The Revealed and Hidden Writings of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav: His Worlds of Revelation and Rectification 9783110407747, 9783110407716

Citation preview

Zvi Mark The Revealed and Hidden Writings of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav

Zvi Mark

The Revealed and Hidden Writings of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav His Worlds of Revelation and Rectification Translated by Yaacov David Shulman

     MAGNES

This book is published under the aegis of the Chair for the Study of Hasidism in the name of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berdichev sponsored by Levi Yitzchak and Judith Rachmani, Bar Ilan University.

First edition published by the Hebrew University Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 2011: ‫ בכתביו הגלויים והסודיים של ר׳ נחמן מברסלב‬: ‫התגלות ותיקון‬ Hitgalut ṿe-tiḳun : bi-khetavaṿ ha-geluyim ṿeha-sodiyim shel R. Naḥman mi-Bratslav

ISBN 978-3-11-040771-6 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-040774-7 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-040777-8 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2015 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston & The Hebrew University Magnes Press, Jerusalem Cover image: Gile68/iStock/Thinkstock Typesetting: Michael Peschke, Berlin Printing: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Printed on acid free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com www.magnespress.co.il

Dedicated, with respect and appreciation, to Eli and Yaffa Rotter

Table of Contents Introduction  1

Part One: Revelation Chapter One  The Test of Letter Combinations: The Mystical Initiation Ceremony that Rabbi Nachman Underwent, and its Echoes in Likutei Moharan  7 1 Introduction  7 2 The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony  8 3 The messianic aspect  23 4 From a vision to a Torah teaching  25 Chapter Two  “The Story of the Bread”: Receiving the Torah  29 1 Introduction  29 2 Published text and manuscript  32 3 “The Story of the Bread”: Rabbi Naftali’s manuscript and other manuscripts  35 4 The provenance of the story and its chain of transmission  38 5 Regarding the story  39 6 The autobiographical element  48 7 “Like Moses”  52 8 From story to discourse: “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (Likutei Moharan I 19)  61 9 States of consciousness: sleep, dream, vision, awakening, and wakefulness  73 10 Concealment and its function  79 11 Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual level following the revelation  88 Chapter Three  The Stream of Mystical Consciousness: The Character of Mystical Experience and the Way that it is Shaped as Literature in “The Guest Who Came In”  90 1 Circles of dissociation  94 2 The root of the unfamiliar: yearnings for holiness  101

viii 

 Table of Contents

3

The guest’s explanation: bringing the mystical element to the forefront  104 4 What was revealed to the householder’s soul in flight  114 5 The demonic contingency  120 6 The character of the mystical experience and the way in which it is fashioned  125 7 “The Guest Who Came In”: the autobiographical element  127 8 The way of mysticism: from “The Story of the Bread” to “The Guest Who Came In”  131

Part Two: Rectification Introduction: The Enterprise of Rectifications  139 Chapter Four  The Formulation of the Universal Rectification, the Rectification for a Nocturnal Emission, and the Pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s Grave–and their Connection to Bratslavian Messianic Fervor  142 1 Introduction  142 2 The chronology  143 3 The universal rectification  145 4 The rectification for a nocturnal emission  161 5 The universal rectification and the rectification for a nocturnal emission  176 6 The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, and new objectives in reciting the ten psalms  177 7 The connection between the rectifications and messianic fervor  190 Chapter Five  The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice of not Avoiding Tests  192 1 “He desired tests”  192 2 Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests  195 3 The tests  208 4 Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan on the link between Rabbi Nachman’s erotic tests and his unique, messianic status  215



Table of Contents 

 ix

Chapter Six  “The Story of the Armor”: More from the Bratslav Archives Containing Suppressed Texts  225 1 Introduction  225 2 Manuscripts  230 3 “The Story of the Armor”  230 4 About the story  232 5 On the semantic field: what is the link between the armor and a nocturnal emission?  233 6 The impetus to esotericism  248 7 “The Story of the Armor” and the hypothesized link between the rectification and Sabbatianism  255 Chapter Seven  Arrows and Melodies: “The Story of the Beggar without Hands”  257 1 “Un ikh heil zi” (‘And I heal her’)  257 2 Melodies and arrows: more on the midrashic and kabbalistic underpinning of the rectifications and stories  268 Chapter Eight  Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”  278 1 Uman and the enterprise of the rectifications  278 2 “He requested of the Lord, may He be blessed, that he may die in sanctification of [God’s] Name”: Rabbi Nachman and dying in sanctification of God’s name  280 3 Self-sacrifice via the faculty of thought and imagination  282 4 Sacrifice of one’s good name  284 5 The elevation of fallen souls in Uman  289 6 Sanctification of God’s name, ten chapters of psalms, the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the rectification performed on pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave   292 7 The yearning to die in sanctification of God’s name as part of Rabbi Nachman’s mission in his identification with Messiah son of Joseph  296 8 The dream about Yom Kippur and Rabbi Nachman’s self-sacrifice  300 9 Rabbi Nachman’s final days  307

x 

 Table of Contents

Chapter Nine  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification: The Pilgrimage to Uman on Rosh Hashanah, the Worldwide Universal Rectification, Tashlikh and Body Jewelry  312 1 Introduction  312 2 The flourishing renaissance of Bratslav Hasidism  313 3 The ten chapters of psalms, from the rectification for a nocturnal emission to the universal rectification–from ritual to amulet  320 4 The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah  324 5 The rectification and messianism  337 Afterword  339

Appendix Appendix One  “The Story of Rabbi Perachia”: Additional Links between the Zoharic Literature and “The Guest Who Came In”  347 Appendix Two  Mysticism and the “Stream of Consciousness”: A Note Following the Analysis of “The Guest Who Came In”  350 Appendix Three  Photographs of Manuscript Pages  353 Bibliography  361 Name Index  377 Subject Index  381

Introduction Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav’s rich and diverse body of work has in recent decades attained a popularity and efflorescence that it never knew before. Rabbi Nachman’s writings are read and studied by a variety of types–Hasidic and non-Hasidic, religious and non-religious–and exercise an influence on contemporary Israeli and Jewish culture. The present book will discuss the foundations of Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual world and, with that, the foundations of Bratslav Hasidism. This book centers on two closely linked foci. One comprises Rabbi Nachman’s mystical revelations and experiences, including their influence upon his self-perception as a trans-generational tzaddik and upon the spiritual and messianic challenges that he undertook. The other comprises the body of rectifications and rituals that he established, which shaped and continue to shape the world of Bratslav Hasidism. The concluding chapter of this book is dedicated to a discussion of developments in the acts of rectification in Bratslav Hasidism that came into being after Rabbi Nachman died, with particular attention given to the developments of the last decades. In a previous book, Mysticism and Madness,1 I discussed at length Rabbi Nachman’s view that intellectual knowledge is merely one channel of the stream of life, and not necessarily the central or most elevated channel. This view led him to state that a person must attempt to attain states of awareness absent of knowledge, and that (after requisite preparations) those states can be filled with pure imagination and Godly inspiration. But whereas that book endeavored to clarify the nature of Bratslav mysticism, it did not describe and analyze the diversity of Rabbi Nachman’s mystical experiences, some of which he communicated to those close to him.2 This lacuna has been filled, at least partially, in Part One: Revelation of the present book. Throughout, this book makes extensive use of the esoteric writings of Brats­ lav Hasidism. Some of these have been published recently and others may be found only in manuscripts that have yet to become openly available. Part One: Revelation begins with a fascinating description of a mystical visionary experience that Rabbi Nachman had, and two teachings that it engendered. These teachings stand on their own, and if not for the report of Rabbi Yishaya Shalom (who heard Rabbi Nachman tell about his experience) no one could have 1 Mark, Mysticism and Madness. 2 Although Mysticism and Madness discusses one of Rabbi Nachman’s personal mystical experiences, it does so tentatively and does not contextualize it within Rabbi Nachman’s rich and fascinating world of revelations attested to by many reports. See Mark, Mysticism and Madness, p. 231.

2 

 Introduction

imagined that these teachings are based on a mystical experience, and certainly no one could have imagined its particular and fascinating character. Part One: Revelation discusses as well the heretofore hidden narrative, “The Story of the Bread” (also known as “The Story of Receiving the Torah”), which describes a potent revelation, pregnant with meaning, that Rabbi Nachman exper­­ienced in his youth. The intensity of that revelation and its possible implications impelled Rabbi Nachman to caution “that all who hear [it] are bound by a common commitment not to reveal it to an outsider”–and the story in fact remained unknown to outsiders for over 200 years. I see in this narrative a reflection of one of the experiences that established Rabbi Nachman’s self-awareness as a trans-generational tzaddik, a tzaddik on the level of Moses-Messiah, who receives the Torah and redeems Israel. This story is a fascinating and unusual mystical document of prophecy and revelation that can serve as a basis for a new Torah and a new religion. Part One: Revelation concludes with a two-chapter study of “The Story of the Guest Who Came In” (which appears in Chayei Moharan). The story describes a mystical experience whose character differs from and even opposes that of “The Story of the Bread.” This difference illustrates the rich and variegated nature of Rabbi Nachman’s mystical world. These two chapters utilize tools that come predominantly from the field of literary analysis in order to evaluate the stories’ literary qualities with the goal of arriving at a deeper understanding of their intent and meaning. I should point out that it was not possible within the framework of this book to discuss all Rabbi Nachman’s preserved visions and revelations. Instead, I was forced to limit myself to a few examples of experiences from his rich mystical world. Part Two of this book, entitled Rectification, discusses all of the rectifications that Rabbi Nachman instituted: the rectification for a nocturnal emission, the universal rectification, and the pilgrimage to his grave in Uman. These rectifications played an important role in Rabbi Nachman’s activity as a Hasidic admor (leader), and they constitute an important component of the path that he fashioned for his Hasidim, including the generations to come after his death. Part Two: Rectification opens with a description of the content of these rectifications and the process of their crystallization, as it demonstrates their connection to Rabbi Nachman’s custom of subjecting himself to tests in the sexual realm. Here too I am assisted by hidden manuscripts (excised from the published literature) that have preserved descriptions of the tests of a sexual nature that Rabbi Nachman experienced in his youth. “The Story of the Armor,” one of the hidden stories that Rabbi Nachman told and requested not be revealed to outsiders, is connected to the rectifications that

Thanks 

 3

he instituted. The story and the context in which it rests contribute to a deeper understanding of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications and of the daring concealed within them. I will discuss the rectifications’ kabbalistic foundations–particularly those found in the zoharic literature and in the teachings of the Ari, sources with which Rabbi Nachman was familiar. The disclosure of these sources renders moot academic conjecture regarding a presumed link between Rabbi Nachman’s rectification for a nocturnal emission and Sabbatian manuscripts–manuscripts that Rabbi Nachman had absolutely no opportunity to see. Part Two: Rectification also discusses Rabbi Nachman’s aspiration to die in the course of sanctifying God’s name, and the link between that wish and his rectifications. This discussion unveils a previously-unnoticed link between Rabbi Nachman’s decision to be buried in Uman and the rectifications that he instituted. The concluding chapter of Part Two: Rectification and of the book as a whole moves 200 years forward from Rabbi Nachman’s passing away (5571) to the present day. This chapter describes developments and changes that have taken place in Bratslavian rectifications and rituals in the last 200 years–in particular, in the last decade (5760–5770). Inter alia, I will discuss the mass pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah, and rituals that have lately been created in its framework, such as “the worldwide universal rectification” and the casting away of body jewelry during Tashlikh. These developments will be discussed against the background of the flourishing of Bratslav Hasidism in recent decades, in which Rabbi Nachman has been transformed into a hero of contemporary Israeli culture. In addition, it will clarify the connection between the mass pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave and the messianic hopes that pulse today amongst Bratslav Hasidim.

Thanks It is a pleasant duty to thank the individuals and institutions that have assisted in the research that went into the writing and publication of this book. Dr. Jonathan Garb, Professor Hillel Weiss, Rabbi Eliezer Cheshin, Rabbi Yom Tov Cheshin, David Lang, Rabbi Yehoshua Mondshine, my son Yehoshua Mark, Professor Havivah Pedaya, Professor Ada Rapoport-Albert and Dr. Elchanan Shilo read various sections of the book and made useful and extremely interesting comments; my heartfelt thanks to them. The community of students at the Shalom Hartman Institute provided me with a fruitful, supportive and challenging environment; my thanks to the members of the Machon and to its heads. A special thanks is owed to Rabbi Leibel Berger for giving me access to his Bratslav Hasidic

4 

 Introduction

archive; its rare publications and manuscripts were of great help to me. (Sadly, he passed away last year.) Thanks to Avi Ben-Amitai for his dedicated and professional work in his linguistic editing of the book. Sincere thanks to the Schocken Institute for Jewish Research, a division of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and to its head, Prof. Shmuel Glick, for permission to publish excerpts from and facsimiles of manuscripts in the Schocken Library. A heartfelt thinks to the librarian, Rabbi Baruch Yunin, for responding patiently and expertly to all of the requests made of him. The attainment of various manuscripts was supported by Beit Shalom of Kyoto, Japan. The book was written as part of a study (04/430) supported by the Israel Science Foundation. In 2013, Bar Ilan University established the Chair for the Study of Hasidism in the name of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berdichev sponsored by Levi Yitzchak and Judith Rahmani, which I have had the privilege of heading. I would like to take this opportunity to express my thanks to Levi Yitzchak and Judith Rahmani for entrusting me with the responsibility of broadening research into areas of study that I know are so close to their hearts. May they—together with their families— derive blessings from all of their worthwhile activities, in health and in happiness.

 Part One: Revelation

Chapter One The Test of Letter Combinations: The Mystical Initiation Ceremony that Rabbi Nachman Underwent, and its Echoes in Likutei Moharan 1 Introduction A thorough study of Rabbi Nachman’s teachings coextensive with a thorough study of his visions and mystical experiences reveals that his teachings drew directly from those visions. His visionary revelations served as the experiential core and source of the information that he would later develop into the teachings that he delivered both orally and in writing–among these, visions that were recorded as such before being shaped into his teachings and lessons. These visions of Rabbi Nachman decisively influenced his life in important ways and shaped the religious path that he developed and advocated for his Hasidim. The particular visionary experience that will be discussed in this chapter apparently occurred in Rabbi Nachman’s youth and was at a later stage developed into a teaching that appears in Likutei Moharan.1

This chapter is based on the essay, “The test of letter combinations: The mystical initiation ceremony that Rabbi Nachman underwent, and its Echoes in Likutei Moharan.” Da’at 68–69 (5771): pp. 131–147. [Hebrew]

8 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

2 The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin (1825–1894), a prolific Bratslav author and one of the central figures of the third generation of Bratslav Hasidism,1 quotes the following words of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav.2 I heard from R. Dovid Tzvi that he heard from his grandfather, R. Yishaya Shalom (may his memory be for a blessing)3 that once our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) spoke as follows: I was someplace where I was invited to read (in Yiddish: leinen)4–in other words, I [was asked to] recite the letter combinations of the entire Torah, from bereishit [‘in the beginning,’ the first word of the Pentateuch] to l’einei kol Yisrael [‘in the eyes of all Israel,’ the last phrase of the Pentateuch] …5 After I performed this leinen, I was given another leinen to do: to recite the letter combinations in tashrak [backwards form], from l’einei kol Yisrael to bereishit. And I performed this leinen as well. After that, the Torah was divided into two parts, with the second part of the Torah first and the first part second, and I was told to recite the letter combinations [of that]. But I was unable to do so, and I felt deeply ashamed–like a good boy who is given [a text] to read and cannot do so, and people are standing there, [before whom] he feels ashamed [in Yiddish: azoi vi men git a gut yungel a leinen un er ken nit, un se shtein derbei mentshen, hot er bushah].

1 This Rabbi Nachman was the av beit din (chief rabbi) of the community of Tcherin. Amongst his works are commentaries on Rabbi Nachman’s books, such as Parpar’ot LeChokhmah on Likutei Moharan and Rimzei Ma’asiyot on Rabbi Nachman’s Sipurei Ma’asiyot. He also composed works dedicated to clarifying particular topics in Rabbi Nachman’s teachings, such as Yikra DeShabbata on the Sabbath and Zimrat Ha’Aretz on the Land of Israel. Similarly, he composed Leshon Chasidim and Derekh Chasidim, which present the thought of the first generations of Hasidic masters, in which he demonstrates mastery of the entire Hasidic corpus. He wrote other works as well, but only some of them were preserved and published. Regarding him and his goals in his exegeses on Rabbi Nachman, see Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 136–150. 2 This passage appears as an appendix to Yemei HaTla’ot, written by Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman of Tulchyn, and published by Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz, pp. 201–202. 3 Rabbi Yishaya Shalom was the son of Rabbi Yudl of Dashev. He served as rabbi of Medvedevka and, like his father, is considered amongst the greatest of the students of Rabbi Nachman. See more about him in Gidulei HaNachal, p. 56. 4 Leinen may be translated as: ‘reading, reading aloud, learning, solution, study, elucidation.’ See Tsanin, Milon, p. 252. 5 At this point a parenthetical remark appears: “From this, one may understand something of the greatness of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing), for he praised himself in his holy talks: ‘My Torah is very high; and wherever I use letter combinations, that is the highest, etc.’ ([Sichot Haran,] 203, p. 248).”



The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony 

 9

I recalled that as soon [as a person perceives] that something is lacking [in himself], that [indicates that] something is lacking [in the realm of Godliness] [in Yiddish: hab ikh mikh dermant vi bald chesaron, iz zikh a chesaron]. [And that is true] whether [a person’s imperfection expresses itself] in physical or in spiritual matters. And that is [the meaning of the phrase,] “You made [man] a little less than God” [Psalms 8:6]. [At that point,] I could not serve the Lord joyfully [in Yiddish: hab ikh nit gekant dinen l’Hashem Yisborach besimchah]. So I thought, Who am I [in Yiddish: hab ikh zikh meyashev geven, ver bin ikh] that the King Himself should tell me what He lacks, as it were? Is there a greater honor than that? And from that [thought] itself, I attained great joy. And that [is alluded to in the words,] “You crown him with honor and splendor” [ibid.], [which refer to] “a new state of consciousness” [literally, ‘brains’]6. And then I performed that leinen. 7

This leinen that Rabbi Nachman performed may be regarded as a sort of initiation ceremony, a rite of passage that tested the level of his expertise in combining letters of the Torah. Although leinen literally means ‘reading,’ it also has the meaning of ‘a reading test.’8 As will be shown later on, Rabbi Nachman himself used the expression leinen in that sense. This test is based on a pattern of traditional Jewish educational practices and children’s initiation ceremonies. There exist testimonies to the effect that as far back as Talmudic times a teacher would begin his instruction by teaching his pupils to recite the alpha6 Mochin–‘brains’ in Aramaic. Regarding Rabbi Nachman’s explanation of the concepts of “small consciousness” (mochin dekatnut) and “expanded consciousness” (mochin degadlut) as a reference to an individual’s spiritual states, and on the roots of these concepts in the kabbalah of the Ari, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 185–217. 7  From the manuscript of the rabbi of Tcherin (may his memory be for a blessing), copied from the manuscript of the rabbi and Hasid, the elevated, God-fearing member of our true Hasidim, our master and rabbi, Shmuel Heschel, son of Rabbi Avraham Tzvi Friedman (may his memory be for a blessing, who passed away in the holy city of Yaffa in 5678, 14 Kislev [29 November 1917], may his soul be bound in the bond of eternal life). Copied from the manuscript of the rabbi, genius, Hasid, etc., our master and rabbi, Rabbi Nachman (may his memory be blessed), av beit din [chief rabbi] of the holy community of Tcherin. Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), pp. 201–202 This passage is followed by a note directing the reader to Likutei Moharan I 89. Further on, this text will be analyzed. 8 By way of example, in his memoir about the Yeshiva of Lomza before the First World War, Yom Tov Lewinsky tells about a comprehension test that students had to pass in order to be accepted into the yeshiva, called [in Yiddish] makhn a leinen–‘making a reading’ (Lewinsky, “Al hayeshiva hagedolah,” p. 349).

10 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

bet. First they would recite the alphabet forwards, then backwards, and finally in atbash form–i.e., the first letter paired with the last, the second letter with the second-to-last, and so forth. The description of Rabbi Akiva’s first steps in learning Torah, when he joined a class of school children, may be referring to this custom: “Immediately, [Rabbi Akiva] went with his son, and they sat with the school teachers. [Rabbi Akiva] said to [the teacher]: Rabbi, teach me Torah. Rabbi Akiva took hold of one end of the [writing] board. [The teacher] wrote alef bet [the first two letters of the alphabet] for [Rabbi Akiva] and he learned it. [The teacher then wrote] alef tav [the first and last letters of the alphabet] and he learned that … [Rabbi Akiva] learned and made progress until he learned the entire Torah.”9 In later eras as well, this recitation of the alphabet forwards and backwards served as a component in initiation ceremonies that introduced a child to the world of Torah learning. When the child was taken for the first time from his home to the study hall or to his teacher’s home, his family would accompany him in a joyful, festive parade. In the teacher’s home a ceremony was arranged that included, among other things, the reading of letters.10 It is reasonable to assume that Rabbi Nachman recognized the echoes of this custom from the Talmud and other sources. Possibly, this custom was still in existence in some form in his own lifetime, whether in the way that children began to learn or as a component of a test that served as an initiation ceremony for the young pupil.11 In this context, when Rabbi Nachman states that he was asked to perform a leinen of letters, he is describing himself as a child engaged in an educational ceremony. This idea is reinforced by the fact that when Rabbi Nachman mentions the shame of his failure, he offers the analogy of a child who, in the presence of adults, is asked to engage in a ritualistic reading (leinen), and whose failure to do so shames him.12 9 Avot DeRebbe Natan, Version A, Chapter 6. Regarding this, see Marcus, Tiksei Yaldut, pp. 11, 48, 57–60, 63–66, 150–153. 10 Marcus, ibid. 11 Marcus describes a ceremony from the time of the Middle Ages, but believes that various components of this ceremony continued to exist in later periods; see ibid., p. 59, note 4. Although the test that Marcus describes ends in a light-hearted spirit, it seems reasonable to accept his assumption that its basis is “an older custom” that was known to the participants. 12 An excellent description of a child’s embarrassment for his failure is found in the testimony of Shmaryahu Levin (1867–1935) regarding a similar test that his grandfather arranged for him to undergo before his first experience in cheder of the holiday of Shavuot. He succeeded in reciting the alphabet forwards but failed to say it backwards, “and great was my embarrassment” (Levin, Yalduti, p. 78; quoted by Marcus, Tiksei Yaldut, p. 59, note 4).



The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony 

 11

Before addressing the nature of this leinen, I will examine other episodes in which Rabbi Nachman engaged in a leinen. Avaneha Barzel relates that in his youth Rabbi Nachman concealed his greatness to such an extent that even his father-in-law, in whose house he lived, had no conception of his attainments: Once one of the Maggid’s disciples stayed with [Rabbi Nachman’s father-in-law. The fatherin-law told the student] of his sorrow that he had taken a descendant of the Baal Shem Tov to be his son-in-law, but [this descendant] did not learn [any Torah] at all and there was no doubt that he had even forgotten Hebrew. The guest said that this was certainly not the case, because he was afraid to say anything against a descendant of the Baal Shem Tov. But [Rabbi Nachman’s] father-in-law insisted until the guest told him, “In that case, I will give him a leinen.” He began to test [Rabbi Nachman] on the mishnah, “The dog and the kid that jumped from the top–meirosh–of the roof.”13 [Rabbi Nachman] began by saying, “The dog and the kid that jumped–marsh…,” and the guest grew very embarrassed. [Rabbi Nachman’s] father-in-law told [the guest], “Didn’t I tell you that he has even forgotten Hebrew…?” Afterwards, [the guest] came upon [Rabbi Nachman] alongside the wall of the house when they were alone. He asked him, “Is such a thing possible? Aren’t you a descendant of the Baal Shem Tov and of Rabbi Nachman of Horodenka? Your father-in-law liberally gave a vast dowry because of [your] pedigree, yet you do not learn [any Torah] at all, to the point that you have even forgotten Hebrew.” And as he said these words, he slapped [Rabbi Nachman in the] face twice.14

The leinen here is not administered as part of a celebratory initiation ceremony, but in order to test the youth’s knowledge of Mishnah and Hebrew. Here Rabbi Nachman’s failure is accompanied by the shame that the guest experiences as he is confronted with the ignorance of the Baal Shem Tov’s great-grandson. Avaneha Barzel also describes a later episode in Rabbi Nachman’s life, in which he engages in a leinen: One time [Rabbi Nachman] was staying with his uncle Rabbi Borukh. His uncle delivered a teaching, but [Rabbi Nachman] was not impressed by his teaching, and this was related to the rabbi, Rabbi Borukh.

13 b. Bava Kama 21b. 14 Avaneha Barzel (5758), 9, p. 422.

12 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

Rabbi Borukh said, “And if someone cannot deliver a teaching, is he not a guter yid–a ‘good Jew’?15 After all, the Maggid of Mezeritch did not know the meaning of left-handedness–so was he no longer a guter yid?” Hearing this, [Rabbi Nachman] said, “This means that I am being given a leinen, for I need to know what left-handedness is.” Shortly thereafter, he delivered [Likutei Moharan I,] Teaching 66, which speaks about left-handedness.16

In this story too the leinen is a challenge and test–however, this time not to a youth but to a rebbe who is contending for the title of guter yid, qualified to teach Torah. Rabbi Borukh’s statement that the Maggid of Mezeritch did not know what left-handedness is and thus could not deliver a teaching about it challenged Rabbi Nachman, who felt that “I am being given a leinen” and hastened to demonstrate that he was qualified to deliver a teaching even on the topic of left-handedness. Now I will return to the story that is the focus of the present discussion, and attempt to clarify the meaning of the leinen that Rabbi Nachman underwent. The following questions arise: What need was there to monitor his ability to engage in “the letter combinations of the entire Torah”? What was the importance of knowing the combinations forward, backward (“in tashrak”) and in even more complicated combinations? Who administered this leinen to Rabbi Nachman? What was the meaning of Rabbi Nachman’s failure in the course of the test? And what made it possible for him to at last regain his composure and succeed? There is no doubt that the ability to combine the letters of the Torah signifies an expertise that allows a person to engage in Jewish mysticism and magic. “Combining letters” is a portentous expression in Jewish esoteric literature throughout the generations, from the period of the Talmud to that of Hasidism. Kabbalistic and Hasidic literature attributes great importance to letters, and ascribes magical and mystical abilities to those who know their combinations. God created heaven and earth with letters, and man too can know the secret of letter combinations. “Rabbi Yehudah said in the name of Rav: Bezalel knew how to combine the letters with which heaven and earth were created.”17 In addition, combining letters in various ways, forward and backwards, is a well-known component of the secret science of “combinations.” Rabbi Menachem Tzioni, a fourteenth-century Ashkenazi kabbalist, writes: “We have a tradition that the alphabet was written on the arm of the Holy One, blessed be He, like an amulet in the hand of a hero, in the [backward] order of tashrak. And [the letters] 15 A term for a Hasidic tzaddik who leads a community. 16 Avaneha Barzel (5758), 72, pp. 450–451. 17 b. Berakhot 55a.



The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony 

 13

were carved and transmitted in the [forward] order of avgad.”18 And he writes regarding the combination of letters, “Know that with the combination of the 22 holy letters that were written on the arm of the Lord, be he blessed, He created man.”19 God Himself uses the combinations of letters as an amulet. With the combination of these letters, He created man. But, as stated above, it is not only God Who combines letters, for man too is called upon to do so: “Just as I made heaven and earth with My words, you do so as well.”20 Combining letters is an important tool in man’s magical creative activity, which reaches its apex in the ability to create a golem and even to create a man. At the same time, combining letters is a mystical practice that helps a person rise spiritually and cling to God.21 Letters and letter combinations played an important role as well in Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav’s world. Rabbi Nachman adopted the concept that letters and their combinations are hidden in every entity. The letters constantly awaken and renew that entity’s being: “In this way, the power of the letters of the Holy Tongue that exists in everything in the world is awakened and expanded, because every entity contains a number of combinations of letters, with which this entity was created … Thus does the power of the Lord grow and awaken in the act of Creation–that being the letters that exist within every single entity in the world.”22 Letters disturbed Rabbi Nachman’s rest, driving sleep from his eyes. “He said, ‘I cannot sleep, because before [I go to] sleep all 600,000 letters of the Torah come and stand before me.”23 Even after he would succeed in falling asleep, the letters and letter combinations would not leave him but would appear again and

18 Tzioni, Peirush Al HaTorah, pp. 1d–2a. 19 Ibid., p. 4c. These sources are quoted and discussed by Idel, Olam HaMalakhim, p. 22. 20 Cf. Zohar, Part 1 (“Hakdamah”), p. 5b, quoted by Rabbi Nachman in Likutei Moharan I 64:4. 21 Regarding the important place of letters and letter combinations in kabbalah and in Hasidism, see Scholem, Pirkei Yesod, pp. 71–82, 389–390; Liebes, Torat HaYetzirah, as listed in the index. Regarding combining letters as a mystical technique, see Idel, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, pp. 97–103. Regarding combining letters as a magical technique, see Idel, Golem, pp. 242–246, and see the index entries “letters” and “letter combinations.” For an extensive survey on the topic of the power of letters, see Garb, Hofa’atav Shel HaKoach BaMistikah HaYehudit, pp. 142–166. Regarding letters and combining letters as a magical tool and as a mystical intermediary in the Hasidic context, see Idel, Hasidism: Between Ecstasy and Magic, pp. 55–59, 156–170. The place of letters in Jewish culture and in particular in secret teachings is dealt with in Lipiner, Chazon Ha’Otiot. See also Idel, Absorbing Perfections, pp. 26–201. 22 Likutei Moharan I 19:6. 23 Sichot Haran, 176, p. 222.

14 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

again in his dreams and visions.24 Rabbi Nachman told his Hasidim that the topic of combining letters is “very great,” and that the teachings in which he employs letter combinations are the highest that he wrote.25 Expertise in combining letters of the entire Torah is therefore a skill that imparts magical and mystical abilities, and that makes it possible to transmit the highest teachings. The leinen that Rabbi Nachman underwent is therefore a sort of kabbalah test and initiation ceremony for the neophyte mystic, who must prove his ability and skill in combining the letters of the Torah in all of their characteristics. A survey of other mystical episodes in Rabbi Nachman’s life reveals that the mastery and skill in combining letters of the Torah that were required of him in this test were vital to the continuation of his mystical path, and on a number of occasions his knowledge of the secret of combining letters constituted a key element in his mystical experiences. There were instances in which Rabbi Nachman did not understand what was happening to him because of his inability to decipher letter combinations. This occurs, for example, in the narrative about “The Guest Who Came In” (in Chayei Moharan). The story opens with a description of a man’s yearning “to know how one arrives at a certain level of holiness.” As the story progresses, he finds a book, which “was filled with combinations of letters: alef, zayin, chet, and dalet, and so on.” The man “had a strong desire to learn that book,” but throughout the entire story he does not do so. He is unqualified to understand the letter combinations in it, and thus cannot actualize his desire to learn and understand.26 Conversely, the hidden story called “The Story of the Bread,” which will be discussed in the coming chapter, relates a powerful revelation that Rabbi Nachman attained, crowned by his success in realizing his wondrous abilities to combine the letters of the entire Torah. The story describes Rabbi Nachman as digesting “a basket of letters mixed together, out of order.” Afterwards, “he opened his mouth, and letters arranged in combinations emerged from it … and in this he saw the entire Torah.”27 It is therefore clear that Rabbi Nachman’s ability to combine letters had a decided impact on his mystical visions. The existence of that ability led to peak

24 Examples of this appear below in Chapters 2 and 3 of the present book. 25 Sichot Haran, 44, p. 53, and 203, p. 248. The great significance attributed to letter combinations prompted Rabbi Natan b. Rabbi Yehudah, a student of Rabbi Natan of Nemirov, to write Kuntres HaTzeirufim, a list of all of the letter combinations that appear in Rabbi Nachman’s writings. Regarding Kuntres HaTzeirufim, see Naveh Tzaddikim, p. 158; Assaf, Bibliografyah, p. 51. 26 See below, Chapter 3. 27 See below, Chapter 2.



The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony 

 15

experiences in Rabbi Nachman’s mystical world, and its absence led to disappointment and the inability to actualize his strong yearnings for holiness. There is an additional means of serving God via letter combinations, one that was initiated by the Baal Shem Tov and then cultivated and intensified by Rabbi Nachman. That was the Baal Shem Tov’s intriguing practice of talking about mundane matters and tales that were on people’s lips. The Baal Shem Tov’s use of this method is well-known,28 being testified to many times. One of the most important of these corroborations is that of his grandson, Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov, who tells, “I heard and saw how my master, my forebear, my grandfather (he is at rest in Eden, may his memory be for the life of the world-to-come), would tell mundane stories and matters via which he would serve the Lord with his clear and pure wisdom.”29 The Baal Shem Tov believed that the leader of the generation possesses a special ability to serve God in this way. “[The following teaching comes] from the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing). [The verse,] ‘May the Lord appoint a man … who will bring them out and lead them in’ (Numbers 27:17), [means that] the leader of the generation can raise all of the sayings and stories of the people of his generation in order to connect the physical to the spiritual (as in [the Talmudic episode of] the two clowns… [b. Ta’anit 22a]).”30 How does the tzaddik raise the tales that he relates? And what is the background to the view that he is able to do so? There are a number of answers to this,31 but for our purposes a comment of Rabbi Ephrraim of Sudilkov, which links this way of serving God to the ability to combine letters, is particularly germane32: The Talmud states: “Bezalel knew how to combine the letters with which heaven and earth were created” (b. Berakhot 55a). … As is known, men of distinction combine the letters of kindness. [In so doing,] they transform the trait of judgment into the trait of compassion. That means that they transform the letters to make an amalgam of kindness. And when, heaven forbid, there are wicked people, they transform, etc. … And the tzaddikim bring about a transformation so that there should be a combination that indicates the seven good…

28 See Nigal, HaSiporet HaChasidit, pp. 15–22; Idel, “L’olam Hashem devarkhah nitzav,” pp. 247– 249. 29 Degel Machaneh Efraim (“Parshat VaYeishev,” s.v. od yesh lomar), p. 50. 30 Keter Shem Tov, p. 9. 31 See Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 83–113; Dan, HaSipur HaChasidi, pp. 34–63; Band, “The Bratslav theory”; Elstein, Pa’amei Bat Melekh, pp. 67–104; Idel, Hasidism: Between Ecstasy and Magic, pp. 185–188. 32 Regarding this, see Idel, above, note 28.

16 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

One can further explain that, as is known, the letters are holy, and all of the worlds–heaven and earth and all of their hosts–were created with them. And everything that a person does– whether for good or whether, heaven forbid, for bad–is with letters, in accordance with the nature of what he does. When he does evil, heaven forbid, he damages the letters that are combined with that evil and drags down the holy letters to lowliness and the depths of the “husks,” heaven forbid. And when there are tzaddikim in the world, when they pronounce the letters–whether in Torah and prayer with fear and love [of God], or whether in words about material matters or in relating stories (as is known from my grandfather, may his memory be for the life of the world to come, that there are people whom one must raise [by telling] stories, and not everyone is capable of doing so, for “not everyone who wants to take the name may do so”)– in this, the letters are raised from murkiness and lowliness to great light, purified … And this, one can say, is alluded to in our Sages’ words: “Bezalel knew how to combine the letters” (b. Berakhot 55a). The term “to combine” may be translated as “to refine” (as in the phrase, “refine silver” [Proverbs 17:3, 27:21]), which means to remove dross and waste so that the silver is pure, clean and pristine. Thus, Bezalel knew how to combine the holy letters and purify them of all dross and admixture, and raise them to their root, to be pure, clean and pristine. And the wise person will understand.33

In this last explanation, Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov translates the Hebrew term for “combine” as “purify.” But it appears that he does not reject the straightforward explanation, which he had used prior to this, when he spoke of combining and organizing letters into new patterns. This is also implied in other statements of the Baal Shem Tov. As Moshe Idel sums up this topic: “The assumption in the various traditions of the Baal Shem Tov is that stories are combinations of letters of fallen matters, which attain rectification by means of the person who combines [the letters], who is, effectively, making a rectification.”34 Rabbi Nachman is the most memorable figure in the Hasidic world to have adopted this way of the Baal Shem Tov of telling stories and discussing superficial matters, and who made this an important part of his own approach. Rabbi Nachman devised an independent and unique style of Hasidic narrative, which does not involve the praise of tzaddikim or a description of the world of the Hasidim, but which instead innovatively reworks “stories that the world tells.”35 At the pinnacle of these are Rabbi Nachman’s 13 stories collected in Sipurei Ma’asiyot.36 In the introduction to this book, Rabbi Natan of Nemirov cites Rabbi Nachman’s explanation for why he engages in such stories, which apparently have no connection to serving God and to the world of holiness. The explanation appears 33 Degel Machaneh Efraim (“Parshat Ki Tissa,” s.v. od yeish l’fareish), p. 123. 34 Idel, ibid., pp. 248–249. 35 Sipurei Ma’asiyot (“Hakdamah”), p. 7. 36 First printing in Ostroh or in Mohilev in 5576.



The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony 

 17

to be built upon the model of combining letters. Here that model is applied in a new manner: stories are deconstructed into their component parts and then recombined in a new order, so as to create rectification and unification. The stories that people tell contain many secrets and very elevated matters. But these stories are damaged, because they are missing a great deal. In addition, they are disorganized and people do not tell them in order: people relate that which belongs at the beginning in the end and vice versa, and the like. But in truth the stories that people tell contain hidden matters, very high. And the Baal Shem Tov (may the memory of a tzaddik and holy man be for a blessing) was able to bring about unifications by means of stories. And when he saw that the supernal conduits were damaged and it was not possible to rectify them by means of prayer, he would rectify them and unify them by telling a story.37

The art of the story of the Baal Shem Tov and of Rabbi Nachman is therefore the ability to disassemble and recombine stories that people tell, in which one must sometimes attach the beginning of a story to its end and its end to its beginning. In this way, one reveals these stories’ hidden and elevated aspects. Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov’s note of caution that “not everyone is capable of doing so, for ‘not everyone who wants to take the name may do so’” is important to our focus. This comment indicates that the work of combining letters in the course of telling stories and making superficial comments deals with dangerous materials, with letters that fell to “lowliness and the depths of the ‘husks.’” Thus, not everyone who wants to engage in the work of combinations may do so. Similarly, as noted earlier, the Baal Shem Tov stated that only the leader of the generation has the ability to engage in this work. Therefore, the knowledge of combining letters includes the ability to raise fallen and dangerous materials with the help of the letters in the stories and superficial comments that one relates. Crucially, Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov experienced a dream or vision on the topic of letters that has a certain similarity to Rabbi Nachman’s vision. As Rabbi Ephraim recorded: “On the holiday of Succot, I saw my grandfather (may the memory of the righteous be for the life of the world-to-come), [the Baal Shem Tov], and he blessed me. Afterwards, I asked him to learn Torah with me, and he

37 Sipurei Ma’asiyot (“Hakdamah”), p. 7. Note as well that Hasidism introduced the idea that the power and utility of stories about tzaddikim is hidden in these stories’ letters. Thus, for instance, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Bodek tells in his introduction to Pe’er MiKedoshim: “The rabbi, the Maggid of Zlatshov (may his memory be for a blessing), said that a person should always tell stories about tzaddikim. This is because the letters of the story arouse the root of all of the miracles, because everything is in letters” (Pe’er MiKedoshim, p. 142; and see also p. 211).

18 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

replied that there will be more time, for God willing I will have length of days and years. And he told me that he will learn the letters of the alphabet with me.”38 The Baal Shem Tov’s response to his beloved grandson was obviously not a dismissive implication that Rabbi Ephraim did not even know how to read and write, and so before he learns Torah he must learn the alphabet. Rather, this was a promise to teach him the secrets of the letters and the ways in which to serve God with them. Rabbi Ephraim himself testified to the Baal Shem Tov’s way of serving God by combining letters, the great rectifications that come about as a result of the work of the tzaddikim who know how to raise and purify letters, and the fact that “not everyone who wants to take the name may do so.” Therefore, from his perspective it was certainly meaningful that the Baal Shem Tov promised to teach him the letters of the alphabet. Rabbi Ephraim’s dream reveals that he himself was not yet expert on the mystery of letters and their combinations, and that he would learn their secret directly from the Baal Shem Tov. Note that such learning cannot occur in this world. At that time, the soul of the Baal Shem Tov was already in heaven. Such learning can occur only in dreams and visions. In Rabbi Nachman’s dream, he was “someplace.” Already an expert in combining letters, he was now being tested regarding the extent of his skill in utilizing them. Not everyone knows how and not everyone is permitted to utilize them. But in this initiation ceremony, Rabbi Nachman passed the test and received a type of permission and authorization to engage in letter combining.

“I was someplace where I was invited to read” Rabbi Nachman envisioned himself as a small child standing in a posture of shame before adults testing him. That imagery is astonishing. Rabbi Nachman was characterized by his “holy insolence” (Likutei Moharan I 30:8). He did not hesitate to confront other tzaddikim–not even the elders of the generation, such as the Grandfather of Shpole, the Rabbi of Neskhiz, and Rabbi Borukh of Mezhibozh–and to engage in sharp and brusque exchanges, in which he proclaimed his great spiritual level and high attainments.39 Who are these figures, therefore, before whom Rabbi Nachman felt confused, like a small child among adults? Furthermore, what is that “someplace” where 38 Degel Machaneh Efraim (“HaChalomot SheNimtza’u BiKhtav Yad HaRav HaKadosh,” s.v. Chag HaSukkot), p. 259. 39 Chayei Moharan (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 113 [10]), pp. 146–149; ibid., 123 (20), pp. 161–164.



The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony 

 19

Rabbi Nachman was called upon to engage in the leinen of letter combinations? Does a study hall exist where kabbalists conduct entry tests and graduation exams, and proffer ordination upon candidates to allow them to engage in letter combining? These questions lead to one conclusion: Rabbi Nachman’s withholding of the identities of the place, participants and context is due to the fact that the place is not geographical, and those who administered the leinen were not human beings. This mystical initiation ceremony occurred entirely in the supernal world, which Rabbi Nachman visited in a dream or vision.40 This in no way attenuates the importance of the incident. To the contrary, it grants it greater significance: Rabbi Nachman passed a test administered not by creatures of flesh and blood but by beings of the upper world. In his opening words, Rabbi Nachman does not mention that he is speaking of a vision or dream. He begins directly with the incident: “I was someplace where I was invited to read.” This opening shapes the reader’s relationship to an incident that is described as actual. Rabbi Nachman does not tell that he dreamed that he was someplace or that he visualized that he was someplace, but that he was someplace–i.e., a real place–where a leinen was administered to him.

“And I felt deeply ashamed” The test and ceremony of passage that Rabbi Nachman underwent to become a mystic who has mastered and is permitted to engage in letter combinations included a stage of failure and shame. Ceremonies of passage and coronation ceremonies in the course of which a person is humiliated are common in various cultures. Arnold van Gennep and Victor Turner, followed by others, have discussed a decisive stage in rites of elevation of social or religious status and ceremonies of coronation in the course of which candidates are humiliated in a variety of ways.41 At times accusations are cast against a candidate for elevation and his 40 There are a number of other instances in Bratslavian literature in which the mention of an unspecified place indicates that an incident occurred in the framework of a mystical experience. One text relating that Rabbi Nachman heard Torah from a high source states, “And he was in the place that he was … a place where they said [words of] Torah” (Chayei Moharan [“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 117 (14)], p. 156; see also Chayei Moharan [“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” 13 (13)], p. 19). And another text, speaking of another spiritual attainment that Rabbi Nachman gained, relates, “I heard from his holy mouth that this was how they were learning the Talmud text in the place that he heard [this]” (Sichot Haran, 133, pp. 167–168). 41 Van Gennep, The Rites of Passage; Turner, The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure, pp. 113–133.

20 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

faults are enumerated, apparently proving him to be unworthy of the position or level that he seeks.42 The process that Rabbi Nachman underwent in his initiation ceremony to become a mystic and combiner of letters, in the course of which he was shown that he was unqualified to combine letters, leading to him to feel shame and humility, appears to fit into the model of ceremonies for change in status. I will return to this comparison after continuing the discussion of the theological and mystical aspects of the initiation ceremony that Rabbi Nachman underwent and the meaning of the shame and humiliation that he experienced.

“You made [man] a little less than God” Rabbi Nachman imparted to his shame and suffering a theological dimension and metaphysical intensity when he reflected that his lack and failure were not solely his own, but reflected a lack in God the King. This understanding of human inadequacies is not new, and Rabbi Nachman is called upon only to remind himself of it–“I recalled.” Indeed, this viewpoint, whose foundation is to be found in the kabbalah of the Ari, is common in Hasidism and quoted numerous times in the name of the Baal Shem Tov. Thus, for example, Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov writes: The following was stated by my master, my forebear, my grandfather (his resting place is Eden, may his memory be for a blessing for the life of the world to come). All things come from the Shekhinah, as it were. And a person must understand that if he lacks any elements that constitutes a lack in the Shekhinah, as it were…. Therefore, in all of a person’s prayers he must request that the lack in the Shekhinah, as it were, be filled. Then correspondingly his own imperfection will be rectified … (as [the Baal Shem Tov] enlightened our eyes in this matter with breadth of awareness).43

The profound implication of Rabbi Nachman’s failure, his awareness of the meaning of human inadequacies and the great responsibility that that implies depressed Rabbi Nachman’s spirit and did not allow him to serve God with joy. In this spiritual state, Rabbi Nachman was unqualified to contend properly with his failure and transform it into an avenue toward a further spiritual process in 42 Turner, ibid., pp. 61–62. 43 Degel Machaneh Efraim (“Parshat Toldot,” s.v. vaye’etar), p. 31. And see also ibid. (“Parshat Va’Eira,” s.v. od), p. 81, and additional places. Something of this nature appears as well in other Hasidic sources. See, for example, Toldot Ya’akov Yosef (“Parshat BeShalach,” 4), p. 175; ibid. (“Parshat Kedoshim,” 5), p. 340; ibid. (“Parshat VaYak’hel,” 2), p. 50. And see also Ohr Yitzhak, 98b.



The test of letter combinations as an initiation ceremony 

 21

whose framework he would succeed in making the letter combinations required of him. The positive turning point occurred when Rabbi Nachman reflected on the great honor given him embedded in the fact that the King was revealing to him what He Himself lacked. This thought filled Rabbi Nachman with feelings of glory and joy. Those feelings crowned him with a new awareness, which made it possible for him to engage in the leinen and pass the test that he had previously failed. Paradoxically, Rabbi Nachman’s failure was the key condition for his success. Only due to that failure did he come to the great insight, leading to joy, that God reveals what He lacks in what a person lacks. If not for Rabbi Nachman’s failure, he could not have attained his sense of closeness to God and joyfulness, and he could not have engaged in the leinen of combining letters. At this point, the fundamental nature of the stage of failure and shame in the process of ascent grew experientially clear to Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Nachman formulated an understanding that it is vitally necessary that a person experience failure so as to gain a general insight relevant to his every spiritual ascent and transformation. In this, Rabbi Nachman revealed an awareness of and provided a conceptual framework for the component of failure that exists in every process of ascent. Thus, Rabbi Nachman writes in the discourse, “Chotem BeTokh Chotem”: When a person wishes to emerge from one level of “we will do and we will listen” (Exodus 24:7) to a higher level of “we will do and we will listen,” a descent must precede the ascent…. [Our Sages state that the verse,] “This obstacle shall be under your hand,”44 refers to “words of Torah that a person does not master unless he stumbles in them.”45 …[This is] because rising from level to level requires an initial descent, which is the “obstacle” ….46

The test of letters that Rabbi Nachman passed is a clear example of the need for a person to face an obstacle and undergo a descent before he can rise to a higher level. This test provides an application of Rabbi Nachman’s interpretation of the statement of the Talmud regarding “words of Torah that a person does not master unless he stumbles in them.”

44 Isaiah 3:6. 45 b. Gittin 43a. 46 Likutei Moharan I 22:11. Rabbi Nachman delivered this teaching after Rosh Hashanah 5565 during the Ten Days of Repentance, days that are dedicated by Jewish tradition to rectification and an attempt to ascend and repent after sin and failure.

22 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

“What is man?” Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual journey resonates to the verses of Psalm 8, a psalm that expresses a fierce opposition between two poles of man’s standing. On the one hand, “When I see Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and stars that You established, what is a person that You recall him and a human being that You take note of him?” On the other hand, “Yet You made [man] a little less than God and You crown him with honor and splendor; You cause him to rule over the works of Your hands. You have placed everything beneath his feet.”47 There is a profound link between, on the one hand, Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual stages of development and the way that he conceptualized them and gave them meaning and, on the other, the dynamic of this psalm. A person’s ability to combine letters represents his mystical and magical ability to resemble God. Combining “the letters with which heaven and earth were created”48 might serve as a magical tool with whose help a person is transformed from creature to creator capable even of making a human golem (as implied by Sefer Yetzirah), or it might serve as a means of clinging to God in mystical unification with Him and thus eradicating the abyss between God and man.49 Either way, the enterprise of combining letters expresses man’s daring attempt to constrict or even eradicate the gap between Creator and created, between God and man. A person’s failure to combine the letters reinstates the distance between him and God, and increases his difficulty in serving God by clinging to Him with the two components of a close relationship: love and joy. Instead, his service of God remains one of fear–i.e., one informed by the awareness of God’s exaltedness and the infinite distance between Him and man. Another process–one quite complex–resides in the episode of the test of the letters. In the first stage of this episode, it is not only the gap between Creator and creation that distances a person from God, and it is not his human failure that divides him from God and makes serving God with joy and intimacy difficult. Rather, the person is aware that this failure is not only a human inadequacy but a Divine shortcoming, and his awareness eradicates his joy and creates a distance between him and God. That failure therefore does not only decrease the image of man but, as it were, the image of God, for it painfully reveals what He lacks. In the latter stage of the process, Rabbi Nachman succeeds in making the leinen. His ability to do so stems from a paradoxical combination of, on the one 47 Psalms 8:4–7. 48 b. Berakhot 55a. 49 See above, note 21.



The messianic aspect 

 23

hand, humility and a feeling of distance from God (“Who am I?”) and, on the other, a feeling of closeness to and intimate partnership with God, Who chooses to reveal His own suffering and lack. Rabbi Nachman’s feeling of closeness to God grows stronger precisely because, in his humility, he is stunned into joy at the realization that through him God chooses to communicate what He lacks, as it were: “Is there a greater honor than that? And from that [thought] itself, I reached great joy.” That joy, rooted in a person’s humility, restores his honor and splendor (“You crown him with honor and splendor”), and provides him with a state of consciousness that opens the secret of letter combinations. This ability to know the hidden power of letter combinations is alluded to by the verse, “You cause him to rule over the works of Your hands. You have placed everything beneath his feet.” Such an awareness, combining humility with grandeur and strengthening a person’s sense of distance from God even as it intensifies his sense of closeness to and partnership with God, is apparently a necessary condition to enter the world of Jewish esotericism with its mystical and magical strata. And Rabbi Nachman attained this in consequence of the spiritual and ceremonial process that he underwent in the test of the letters.50

3 The messianic aspect There may exist an additional aspect of this test: the messianic aspect. Rabbi Nachman’s vision emphasizes that the test requires the ability to make combinations of letters “of the entire Torah, from Bereishit [‘in the beginning’] to l’einei kol Yisrael [‘in the eyes of all Israel’]” and in reverse order as well: that he “recite the letter combinations in tashrak [backwards form], from l’eini kol Yisrael to Bereishit.”51 The requirement to demonstrate total mastery of combinations that arise out of “the entire Torah” from beginning to end apparently sets the bar high even for kabbalists and masters of the secret lore, because not every tzaddik who engages in these mysteries is expected to know all of the combinations and the entire Torah. It is of course possible to explain that Rabbi Nachman set extremely high standards for himself, and was indirectly praising himself. However, it seems that such an answer is insufficient. Rather, this high bar might reveal an additional aspect of the leinen: that its purpose was not only to test the expertise 50 There are interesting parallels in ceremonies of passage of various other cultures. Turner writes on this topic that “[w]hat is interesting about liminal phenomena for our present purposes is the blend they offer of lowliness and sacredness” (Turner, The Ritual Process, p. 96). 51 Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), pp. 201–202.

24 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

required of a kabbalist who engages in letter combinations for magical and spiritual purposes, but to test his worthiness and suitability for an additional objective. A tradition recorded by Rabbi Gedaliah of Linitz (in his Teshuot Chein) in the name of the Baal Shem Tov on the topic of letter combinations may shed light upon this topic: And I heard from the rabbi, the preacher, who spoke in the name of the Baal Shem Tov (his resting place is Eden), that when the messiah comes, may it be quickly, in our days, amen, he will interpret the entire Torah from beginning to end, including all of the combinations in every single word, and afterwards he will make the entire Torah into one word, and its combinations will rise beyond number, and he will speak on all of its combinations. (“The words of the mouth of a sage are lovely” [Ecclesiastes 10:12], and they are suitable for a person who possesses understanding.)52

The ability to interpret the letter combinations of the entire Torah from beginning to end evinces total control over those letter combinations and over the secrets of the Torah, and, according to the Baal Shem Tov, characterizes the wondrous ability of the messiah. Only “when the messiah will come” will there be someone who can interpret the entire Torah with all of its combinations. And this ability–if not more–was demonstrated by Rabbi Nachman in the test of letter combinations when he interpreted “the letter combinations of the entire Torah, from Bereishit to l’einei kol Yisrael,” and did so even in reverse and other arrangements. One may speculate that this tradition, one cited in the name of the Baal Shem Tov, was known to his great-grandson, Rabbi Nachman, and that Rabbi Nachman’s leinen was a ceremony of initiation not only regarding his fitness as a mystic and magician but also regarding his fitness as a tzaddik on the level of the messiah. If so, the day had come for which the Baal Shem Tov had hoped, and regarding which he had prayed, “may it be quickly in our days, amen.” Someone had appeared who knew how to pronounce the combinations of the entire Torah– and that was his great-grandson, Rabbi Nachman. The similarity between Rabbi Nachman and the figure of the messiah is not surprising, for the description of the messiah in Rabbi Nachman’s “Scroll of Secrets” fits his own persona.53 In a parallel passage, Rabbi Nachman expresses his messianic self-conception in a similar indirect fashion, by attributing to 52 Teshuot Chein, p. 114. And see also ibid., p. 22. It is noteworthy that Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, who wrote down the story of the test of letter combinations, was aware of this tradition in the name of the Baal Shem Tov, for he quotes it (in his Parpar’ot LeChokhmah Al Shas) in the name of the author of the Teshuot Chein. See Parpar’ot LeChokhmah (“Bamidbar Rabbah” 2), p. 102. 53 See Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 65–120.



From a vision to a Torah teaching 

 25

himself characteristics that the Baal Shem Tov ascribed to the messiah. This appears in a suppressed portion of Chayei Moharan, one that was published in the edition of 5673 but then omitted from subsequent editions. I heard that [Rabbi Nachman] said that he will learn Torah together with the seven shepherds. (Transcriber’s note: See the Baal Shem Tov’s letter published at the end of Porat Yosef, which states that the messiah learns Torah together with the seven shepherds.)54

The Baal Shem Tov’s letter describes how he experienced an ascent of the soul “until I entered the palace of the messiah, where the messiah learns Torah with all of the Tannaim and tzaddikim, and also with the seven shepherds.”55 Rabbi Nachman, who knew the Baal Shem Tov’s letter and could assume that it was familiar as well to his Hasidim, testifies that he will realize the Baal Shem Tov’s words about the messiah, in that he will learn Torah together with the seven shepherds. But not even this–Rabbi Nachman’s ability to match the qualifications of the messiah and perhaps even surpass them–is meant to surprise us, for Rabbi Nachman also proclaimed, “All of the beneficial actions that the messiah will perform for Israel, I can perform as well.”56 Against this background, it may be understood that, at the core, the process of initiation that Rabbi Nachman underwent–in the course of which he had to demonstrate his mastery over the letter combinations of the entire Torah–was in truth a test regarding one of the abilities that characterize the messiah. And Rabbi Nachman’s success testified to the fact that all of the beneficial actions that the messiah can perform for Israel Rabbi Nachman can do as well.

4 From a vision to a Torah teaching Until this point, I have discussed Rabbi Nachman’s mystical, visionary experience, the crux of which consists of the test of letter combinations. However, interestingly enough, this experience evidently served as the basis of a brief teaching that appears in Likutei Moharan (I 89). “Yet You made [man] a little less than God and You crown him with honor and splendor.”57

54 Chayei Moharan (“Gedulat Nora’ot Hasagato,” 244 [14]), p. 265. 55 Shivchei HaBesht (“Igeret Aliat HaNeshamah”), MS, p. 235. 56 Chayei Moharan (“Gedulat Nora’ot Hasagato,” 266 [25]), p. 271. 57 Psalms 8:6.

26 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

Behold, it is known that in all that a person lacks– whether spiritual or physical–the lack is in the Shekhinah, which corresponds to [the Divine name,] Elokim [(‘God’)]. And that is [the meaning of the phrase], “You made [man] a little less”–[that phrase is] precise, [because the Hebrew word for “less” also means “lacking”]; “than God” [(this term may be translated as “deriving from God”–in particular, from the name “Elokim,” which is associated with the Shekhinah)]. That is to say, the lack [in the person] certainly [derives] from Elokim–i.e., [it exists] in the Shekhinah. But when a person knows this–that the lack is [both] above [with God] and below [in himself]–he will certainly experience great sorrow and depression, and he will not be able to serve the Lord, be He blessed, with joy. Therefore, he must respond to himself: “Who am I, that the King Himself should tell me His imperfection, as it were? Is there a greater honor than that?” And from that thought itself, he attains great joy, and his mind is renewed. And that is [the meaning of the conclusion of the verse], “You crown him with honor and splendor.” That is to say, as a result of the honor and splendor that [this person] possesses– since the King Himself tells him [what the King] lacks–[the King] crowns [this person] with new consciousness.

The spiritual development that Rabbi Nachman underwent in the course of the test of letter combinations is described clearly in this teaching. In addition, this development was tied to a verse that came to Rabbi Nachman’s mind in the course of the test. It seems all-but-certain that Rabbi Nachman’s experience of the test of the letter combinations constitutes the basis of this teaching. The teaching itself makes no reference to the test of letters–i.e., to the fact that it is reflecting Rabbi Nachman’s personal experience. Rather, the teaching is built solely upon a homiletic interpretation of a verse. Furthermore, it is written in a somewhat detached language–in part, it is expressed in the third person and in the future tense: “when a person knows this … he will certainly experience great sorrow….” This phraseology implies that the teaching is making a speculative assumption regarding a possible future state. The basis of the spiritual process described here is the interpretation of a verse, with no hint that the teaching is based on Rabbi Nachman’s experience. Likutei Moharan I 90, which directly follows this teaching, adds another element to this topic.



From a vision to a Torah teaching 

 27

“I will rejoice in the Lord; transgressors will be eradicated from the earth.”58 Behold, it is known that everything that a person lacks is due to the [primal, cosmic] shattering [of the “vessels”], when sparks [of holiness] fell and were [consequently] lacking from the Shekhinah (as is known). And the rectification comes about when a person causes himself to rejoice in his God. Then all that he lacks due to the shattering [of the vessels] is made complete, and all of the sparks are elevated. And that is [the meaning of the verse: When] “I will rejoice in the Lord,” [then] all of the “transgressors” [(which can be read as “shortcomings”)] “will be eradicated” [(which can be read as “made complete”)] and made whole. That is [to say,] that which is lacking [is made whole]. As [another] verse states, “I and my son Solomon will be [considered] transgressors,”59 [and that connects to the phrase above that “transgressors will be eradicated] from the earth.” That is to say, [the “earth” is a reference to] the “supernal earth,” corresponding to the level of the Shekhinah. [In other words, this verse may be interpreted to mean, “Should I and my son Solomon be ‘lacking,’ that will be due to the incomplete state of the Shekhinah.”]

This teaching emphasizes the theurgic dimension of joy. Although a shortcoming in a person results from a shortcoming in the Shekhinah, that does not obviate the person’s ability and obligation to rectify himself. And he does so by being joyful. Joy is more than an appropriate spiritual state that must accompany a person in all that he does. It is a tool with whose help inadequacies and sins– whether human or Divine–are rectified. It is reasonable to assume that this teaching opens a window to Rabbi Nachman’s experience of the test of letter combinations. In that test, Rabbi Nachman was upset by the lack within the Shekhinah that expressed itself in his failure to recite the required letter combinations. Then, with the help of joy, he rectified his inadequacy. This made him capable of receiving new consciousness and completing the leinen, and thus he rectified the lack within the Shekhinah. It is possible that–in contrast to the verses quoted in Likutei Moharan I 89–the verses quoted in this teaching did not enter into Rabbi Nachman’s mind at the time of his exper­ ience. Nevertheless, it appears that the ideational and experiential foundation of this teaching is to be found in Rabbi Nachman’s visionary experience and his consequent understanding regarding the ability of joy to rectify the shortcomings within man and within the Shekhinah–an understanding that perhaps afterwards was worked and fashioned into this teaching with its additional verses. Therefore, a fascinating mystical visionary experience of Rabbi Nachman and two teachings that he produced on its basis have been preserved and doc58 Psalms 104:35. 59 I Kings 1:21.

28 

 The Test of Letter Combinations

umented. These teachings stand on their own. If not for the preservation of the narrative about Rabbi Nachman undergoing the test of letter combinations, one might never have imagined that they were based on a mystical experience, and one could certainly never have guessed the particular and intriguing nature of that test, which was in the nature of a ceremony that Rabbi Nachman underwent in order to enter into the world of kabbalah and letter combinations. In Part Two: Rectification, I will demonstrate that the idea that joy has the power to rectify transgressions and shortcomings became a central foundation of Rabbi Nachman’s perspective on repentance and of the “rectifications” that he instituted. This perspective–in which joy and not self-mortification and sadness rectifies transgression–is an outstanding characteristic of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, in contrast to the kabbalistic rectifications that preceded him. One may thus view the episode of the test of the letters as an experiential foundation to Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, meaning that he based these rectifications not only on his theoretical homiletics but also on his powerful personal mystical experiences, in which joy rectified failures and transgressions. In conclusion, although at the beginning of his visionary experience Rabbi Nachman appears as a neophyte mystic who fails the leinen given to him, by the end of the process he completes the ceremony of passage to the mystical and perhaps even messianic world. And now his future in these realms lies open before him.

Chapter Two “The Story of the Bread”: Receiving the Torah For almost 200 years, “The Story of the Bread” has been one of the most closely-kept secrets of Bratslav Hasidism, carefully guarded from the eyes of the general public. The story was never published, but was preserved only in recondite manuscripts. Even within Bratslav Hasidic circles it remained covert, so that only a few Bratslav Hasidim had read it or even heard of it.1 In this chapter, I will present the story as it is recorded in a few manuscripts, clarify its biographical and conceptual backgrounds, and discuss its literary characteristics and their connection to the import of the narrative. At the end of the chapter, I will discuss the place of the story within the whole of esoteric Bratslav literature and the light that it sheds on Rabbi Nachman’s view of himself.

1 Introduction The existence of the mysterious tale entitled “The Story of the Bread” has been known to the academic world2 from a collection of fragmentary texts excised from Chayei Moharan–a collection that appeared in an appendix to Yemei HaTla’ot (5693).3 This collection contains sections from the manuscript of Chayei Moharan This chapter is based on “‘The story of the bread’: From the censored Bratslav archives.” Tarbitz 72:3 (Nissan-Sivan 5763): pp. 415–452.[Hebrew] 1 The topic of esotericism in Bratslav Hasidism is discussed at length in academic literature. See Weiss, “Gilui vekisui betorat Breslav,” Mechkarim, pp.  258–81; Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 10–17, 19, 51–53, 62, 111–117, 126, 127; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 8–9, and also intermittently throughout the chapter, “Messianic Strivings,” p. 182–220, and on pp. 228–229; Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” Sod Ha’Emunah HaShabta’it, pp.  238–261. Regarding “The Story of the Bread” as an example of esotericism, see Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 191–192. 2 See Weiss, Mechkarim, ibid., and the notes of the editor, Mendel Piekarz, ibid. 3 Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), pp. 188–200. The collection of deleted excerpts, entitled Sichot MiKhtav Yado Shel Nachman MiTsheherin (‘Talks from the Manuscript of Nachman of Tcherin’), is appended to Yemei HaTla’ot (pp. 201–206). Yemei HaTla’ot was first published by Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz in a limited edition. The pagination indicates that this book was published or prepared for publication as the end of Rabbi Avraham Chazan’s Kokhavei Ohr, which was also published by Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz that year. Yemei HaTla’ot was republished in Jerusalem in 5628, then in Bnei Brak in 5733 and later in a linguistically and stylistically reworked version in Jerusalem (Keren HaNachal, Jerusalem 5757). Although Yemei HaTla’ot has been published a number of times, Bratslav Hasidim still consider the book to be esoteric, and a number of them view its publication as an error that requires correction. Regarding this, see Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 444, note 113.

30 

 “The Story of the Bread”

that, in a process of internal censorship, were removed before the book was published.4 Chayei Moharan was written by Rabbi Natan of Nemirov and first printed by Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin (Lemberg 5634), who added various comments.5 Some of the suppressed passages that appear in this collection were inserted into subsequent editions of Chayei Moharan: a vowelized edition that appeared in 5745 and an edition entitled Chayei Moharan Im Hashmatot (‘Chayei Moharan with Suppressed Passages Restored’) (Jerusalem 5760). However, even these two editions of Chayei Moharan omit all mention of “The Story of the Bread.” The following is the passage that appears in the collection appended to Yemei HaTla’ot referring to “The Story of the Bread”: (After the narration of “The Story of the Bread.”)6 The transcriber writes: I heard that when [Rabbi Nachman] said, “You are responsible to each other not to tell [this story] to an outsider,” one person stood up who, [the Hasidim] feared, might tell it to an outsider since he was talkative. But they did not say anything because they were afraid of [Rabbi Nachman], may his memory be for a blessing. However, they entertained this thought in their minds. [Then Rabbi Nachman], may his memory be for a blessing, spoke up and said, “I will take responsibility for him.” And afterwards they began to ask this man whether he knew about this story, and [they saw that] he did not know anything about the story. And they understood that this was what [Rabbi Nachman], may his memory be for a blessing, [had meant when he] said, “I will take responsibility for him,” because [Rabbi Nachman] caused [this man] to know nothing of this story.7

In recent years, the faction of Bratslav Hasidim loyal to Rabbi Israel Ber Odesser has republished the book. See Yemei HaTla’ot (Keren HaNachal, Jerusalem, 5757). This faction has also published a volume containing Chayei Moharan, Yemei Moharanat and Yemei HaTla’ot Im HaHashmatot (‘Yemei HaTla’ot with Censored Passages Restored’) (Netzach Israel, Jerusalem, 5760), which integrates most of the deletions into the body of the text. 4 From the second edition (Frampol, 5673) and onward, a few of the censored passages were restored, together with explanatory notes and corrections. 5 See Naveh Tzaddikim, p. 76. 6 Here and further on, the parentheses appear in the original, whereas the brackets are my own addition (Zvi Mark). 7 Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot [5693]), p. 195. For a similar occurrence in which Hasidim who were not meant to be partners to a secret forgot what Rabbi Nachman told them, see Avaneha Barzel, 31, pp. 22–30; Weiss, Mechkarim, p. 205. Rabbi Nachman’s discourse, “Patach Rebbe Shimon,” which deals with stories, states that if a person tells a story with the proper intent, “then the Lord, be He blessed, guards him so that his words will not be inscribed in the power of the memory of the student who is unworthy, but [the student] will forget them” (Likutei Moharan I 60:7).

Introduction 

 31

It is evident that Rabbi Nachman designated this story as being esoteric in that, immediately after having told it, he directed his listeners “not to tell it to an outsider.”8 And the seriousness with which Rabbi Nachman viewed the secret nature of the story is reflected in the fact that he did not satisfy himself with requesting each listener’s personal responsibility to guard the secret but demanded that his listeners take responsibility for each other to assure that the story would not be disclosed outside the group. The opening phrase, “After the narration of ‘The Story of the Bread,” is not to be understood as indicating when Rabbi Nachman told the story but rather as a demarcation of the story’s position in the manuscript of Chayei Moharan. That would be similar to the way in which this collection of texts appended to Yemei HaTla’ot marks the original place of other passages elided from Chayei Moharan.9 According to this understanding, “The Story of the Bread” appeared in the manuscript of Chayei Moharan–and this (as will be shown further on) is indicated by other sources as well. In the section of Chayei Moharan called “Sipurim Chadashim,” following Passage 12 (which deals with Rabbi Nachman’s youthful struggle with the desire for food), the following is recorded: “And [Rabbi Nachman] said that this narrative [about his struggle with the desire for food] is related to ‘The Story of Receiving the Torah’ (as [mentioned] above), and he directed [us] to review this story [about his struggle with the desire for food] as well [as ‘The Story of Receiving the Torah’].”10 But no “Story of Receiving the Torah” appears earlier. Thus, it is difficult to understand the connection of that story to Passage 12. Later editions, however, add the following gloss: “In the manuscript of Chayei Moharan, this note is preceded by [the text of] ‘The Story of Receiving the Torah’ (which is [another name for] ‘The Story of the Bread’). And that being the case, you may understand the term, ‘as [mentioned] above.’”11 Thus, “The Story of the Bread” was also called “The Story of Receiving the Torah,” and, in addition, it was part of Chayei Moharan, placed in the book prior to Passage 12. 8 Joseph Weiss correctly notes that the meaning of “outsider” is uncertain here. It might be speaking of a person who is not a Bratslaver Hasid. However, as may be seen in the case of other esoteric material, there are different levels of closeness among Bratslav Hasidim, such that some are considered outsiders and are thus excluded from access to esoteric material (Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 191–192, note 7). 9 For instance: “After talks in Chayei Moharan on serving the Lord, passage 94, discussing depression” (Yemei HaTla’ot [5693], p.  188) and similarly, “After passage 142 in Chayei Moharan: [s.v.] ‘he said to me’” (ibid., p. 189). 10 Chayei Moharan (5688) (“Sipurim Chadashim,” 12), p. 43 (22). 11 For example, Chayei Moharan (5743), p. 58, and Chayei Moharan HaMenukad, p. 89.

32 

 “The Story of the Bread”

Mendel Piekarz notes that allusions to “The Story of the Bread” appear in other writings of Rabbi Natan as well. In Likutei Halakhot, after a long discussion on holy eating, Rabbi Natan writes, “And with this, you may comprehend [at least] some glimmer of the awesome story that we wrote down regarding the tzaddik who succeeded in receiving the Torah by means of eating bread. See there and understand.”12 Another passage by Rabbi Natan presumed by Piekarz to refer to “The Story of the Bread”13 reads as follows: “We have already related the awesome story about the tzaddik who saw all of the bread that was placed before him, which he ate, as being [composed] entirely of letters, etc.”14 Further on, this present book will show that these two suppositions of Piekarz are correct.

2 Published text and manuscript Besides the manuscripts that preserved the story and that will be described further on, Rabbi Eliezer Shlomo Schick published a version of this story (as well as of the secret “Story of the Armor”). Rabbi Schick is the leader of a large group of Bratslav Hasidim in Israel and in the United States who are baalei teshuvah (Jews from a secular background who became religiously observant).15 In a letter responding to one of his Hasidim, he acceded to his request and related these two secret stories.16 He explained his disclosure of stories that had been concealed for so many years by launching a blistering attack on “the elders of our [Hasidic] group” for not publishing this material, but who instead keep the writings of Rabbi Nachman to themselves even as the world thirsts for his words, although there is no reason to refrain from publishing them. And Rabbi Schick argues that Rabbi Nachman himself stated explicitly that his talks are not only “for those who are here” but also “for those who are not here … including the generations to come.”17 12 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 2 (“Orach Chaim: Hilkhot Devarim HaNohagim BiS’udah,” 4:18 [at the end]), p. 109. 13 In notes that he added to Weiss’s Mechkarim, p. 192, note 7. 14 Ibid., Hilkhot Tefillah, 4:10. 15 Regarding Rabbi Schick, see Piekarz, “Neo-Breslaviyut,” Chasidut Breslav, pp. 199–218. 16 Asher BaNachal, Volume 6, pp.  136–138. And see the new and vowelized edition of Asher BaNachal, Volume 14, pp. 336–339. Asher BaNachal, published during the years 5733–5751, contains thousands of epistles gathered into 17 volumes. The various volumes are not strict about recording place and year of publication. 17 Asher BaNachal, Volume 14, pp. 336–339. Regarding Rabbi Schick’s publishing activities and his view of himself, see Piekarz, ibid. Regarding the messianic impetus behind his readiness to reveal the stories, see ibid., p. 202 and note 7.



Published text and manuscript 

 33

Despite Rabbi Schick’s polemics in favor of revealing these esoteric writings, his own policy is not unequivocal. In the first edition of his P’ulat HaTzaddik (a sort of biography of Rabbi Nachman), he mentions “The Story of the Bread” but does not quote the story itself because, he explains, “[Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) cautioned us not to relate it to an outsider; therefore, it remains in handwritten form, and should not be published.”18 However, a footnote directs the reader to Asher BaNachal, letter 738, which relates the story. A later edition of P’ulat HaTzaddik spares the reader this trouble. Rather, he is directed to the end of the book, where this letter from Asher BaNachal appears, including the story.19 In addition, Rabbi Schick prints letters in Asher BaNachal that express ambivalence in regard to the need to reveal and the obligation to conceal. Thus, after he reveals parts of the secret “Story of the Armor”–the first instance of their publication–he adds, “And there are other matters, but because ‘the secret of the Lord is for those who fear Him’ (Psalms 25:14), it is forbidden to write them down.”20 And the same occurs in regard to the “Scroll of Secrets.” On the one hand, Rabbi Schick tells that “I possess a copy of the manuscript of Rabbi Alter Tepliker, containing two parts of the Scroll of Secrets.” Nevertheless, at odds with his call to reveal the secret writings, he states that “because of the warning of [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) that it be a secret–even to the point that it is written only in abbreviations, so that one cannot understand it at all–I refrained from publishing it, and it remains in my possession in manuscript.”21 Rabbi Schick’s ambivalent attitude to revealing the secrets and his way of concealing even as he reveals obligates a comparison of the story as he presents it to manuscript texts.

Manuscripts “The Story of the Bread” exists in a number of Bratslavian manuscripts that were meant to be kept secret. The following is a list of the most important ones. 1. Chayei Moharan Shel R. Naftali (‘Chayei Moharan of R. Naftali’), transcribed by Rabbi Naftali of Nemirov, a close student of Rabbi Nachman and colleague of Rabbi Natan (archive of Rabbi Leibel Berger). Part of the manuscript was tran-

18 P’ulat HaTzaddik (5738), 374, p. 140. 19 P’ulat HaTzaddik (5741), pp. 732–733. 20 Asher BaNachal, Volume 6, p. 138. 21 P’ulat HaTzaddik (Jerusalem), 608, p. 344.

34 

 “The Story of the Bread”

scribed during Rabbi Nachman’s lifetime. This is indicated by the fact that he is mentioned with a blessing for life. 2. Sefer Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan Shel R. Alter Tepliker (‘The Book of Passages Elided from Chayei Moharan, of R. Alter Tepliker’), transcribed in 5658/1898 (archive of Rabbi Leibel Berger). Rabbi Alter was the right-hand man of Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, who published both Chayei Moharan and Yemei Moharanat. 3. Sefer Chayei Moharan, Ketav Yad Korman (‘The Book, Chayei Moharan, Manuscript of Korman’) (Jerusalem, Schocken Institute 14284): a transcription made by Rabbi Yitzhak Meir Korman (5651[?]–5727), which he called Sefer Chayei Moharan. 4. HaMa’aseh MeiHaLechem, Ketav Yad Korman (‘The Story of the Bread, Manuscript of Korman’) (Jerusalem, Schocken Institute 14297): an additional transcript that Rabbi Yitzhak Meir Korman made of “The Story of the Bread,” which consists solely of the transcriber’s introduction and “The Story of the Bread.” 5. Ketav Yad R. Pinchas MiTiveria, Ma’aseh MeiHaLechem (‘Manuscript of R. Pinchas of Tiberias, The Story of the Bread’) (Jerusalem, Schocken Institute 70132/16). This manuscript was in the possession of Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz (1905–1972), and is part of his estate. The copy of “The Story of the Bread” was in a separate envelope. The front of the envelope was inscribed with the words, “forbidden to be opened.” On the other side, written across the flap was a series of signatures of Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz. In addition, the flap was stamped with the words, “The Seal of the Study Hall of Sha’arei Simchah of Bratslav Hasidim, Jerusalem, the Holy City, May It Be Built and Established.” The signatures and stamp assured that the envelope could not be opened without detection. This was apparently meant to discourage anyone from opening it. The envelope contained only a handwritten copy of “The Story of the Bread.” This copy was an excerpt of a larger manuscript, that of Chayei Moharan, which Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz had received from the family of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias (Jerusalem, Schocken Library 16988). Because of the strict secrecy enjoined upon the story, Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz decided to keep it in a separate, sealed envelope (see photograph 1 in Appendix 3). 6. Ketav Yad R. Shmerl MiBerdychiv (‘Manuscript of R. Shmerl of Berditchev’): a copy that was made in 5676 (1915) in Berditchev. The manuscript is in the Vernadsky Central, Scientific Library of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kiev, archive 21, number 11/(5), pp. 10–14. There exist additional manuscripts. However, since these are apparently copies of the manuscripts mentioned above, I did not find it necessary to list them.



“The Story of the Bread”: Rabbi Naftali’s manuscript and other manuscripts 

 35

In this book, I will quote the version of the story that appears in the oldest manuscript extant: Chayei Moharan Shel R. Naftali (‘Chayei Moharan of R. Naftali’). Rabbi Naftali was a close student of Rabbi Nachman and good friend of Rabbi Natan. Prior to that, I quote a brief introduction that appears in other manuscripts, with minor changes among them. Parentheses appear in the original. Brackets and their contents are my own additions–some of them in accordance with additional handwritten manuscripts. Punctuation is also mine.

3 “The Story of the Bread”: Rabbi Naftali’s manuscript and other manuscripts 12. That which [Rabbi Nachman] told when he was living in Zlatipolia. And I, [Rabbi Natan,] did not hear it from [Rabbi Nachman] himself (may his memory be for a blessing), but from the mouth of R.Y. [Rabbi Yudl].22

Story There is [a person] tender in years, and his grandfather was a very great [tzaddik].23 And he himself was not (kei) [kei’ep24]–[i.e.,] a simple person. And he dreamt that his grandfather came and told him to take heed of the foods that he would eat that day. In the morning, he awoke. And it was already very clear to him that his dreams are true, for he had already seen this grandfather of his a number of times, and [on those previous occasions] everything had been true. And he did not understand the meaning of this “taking heed of the foods,” for presumably before as well he had eaten with the [proper] kavanah for eating.25

22 This brief introduction does not appear in Rabbi Naftali’s Chayei Moharan. However, it occurs in all other handwritten manuscripts, with minor variations. I quote Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias’s version of Chayei Moharan. And my interpretation of “R.Y.” as “Rabbi Yudl” is based on Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman’s manuscripts (Jerusalem, Schocken institute 14279; Jerusalem, Schocken institute 14284). 23 Manuscript of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias, Manuscript of Rabbi Alter Tepliker, and other manuscripts. 24 This word appears in the manuscripts of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias, Rabbi Alter Tepliker and Korman. It means “ignoramus” or “peasant.” The word is a variant or corruption of klap. See entry in Tsanin, Milon Ivri-Yiddish. 25 In the framework of the Ari’s kavanot (pl. of kavanah–“meditation”), an especially important place is set aside for the “kavanah for eating,” which involves matters that a person must bear in mind when he eats. See, for example, Rabbi Chaim Vital, Sefer Ta’amei HaMitzvot (“Parshat

36 

 “The Story of the Bread”

And he went to the mikveh, and afterwards he recited a few chapters of psalms with great intent, and he prayed with great intent, and his entire request in his prayer was that the Lord, be He blessed, should help him know the meaning of that “taking heed.” And after praying, he was again very concerned regarding this: to know this matter mentioned above. And he wore himself out, and he went on the bed to lie down and rest. And he slept, and his grandfather came again in a dream and said to him, “You are concerned over the meaning of ‘taking heed.’ I will tell you that today they want to give you the Torah. And the Torah is given only to those who eat the manna. And they want to give you manna to eat.” And he awoke. And he began to be more concerned, for the matter was very good and wondrous, and he yearned deeply to attain this, for manna in itself is something very great– [and] in particular, that in this way he would receive the Torah. And now he must certainly take heed of this. But he did not know the meaning of taking heed, and he was very concerned about that. And he recalled that the midrash quotes the verse, “He afflicted you and made you hungry and fed you the manna,”26 and it comments that before eating the manna [the Jews] fasted on the previous day in order to scour away the food in their bellies. And he considered what to do–“After all, I did not fast yesterday.” And he took a compound27 and he had no compassion on himself. Because he longed greatly for that mentioned above, he took a strong compound, and it caused him a great deal of loose stool until the waste matter left as clean as it had entered. And afterwards he began to be more concerned because of the final residue [of food]28 that still remained in him from the foods of before. [This is] because when a person fasts, [his] blood too is scoured clean, [but he had not had an opportunity to fast]. And he was concerned about this, and he was already very worn out as a result of this [concern] and also as a result of the compound [that he had swallowed]. And he went and rested, and lay on the bed and he dozed. And his grandfather came again and said to him, “You are concerned about the final residue [that still remains]. Come and I will take you to the river of fire,29 and you will rid yourself of [that] final residue as well.” And he went with him. On the way, he saw a number of wondrous, novel matters. When he came there to the river of fire and entered it, he thought that not even a single limb of his would remain. And nevertheless he immersed there and emerged in peace.

Eikev, Kavanot Ha’Akhilah”), pp. 252–257. For more on the kavanah of eating, see Meroz, “Milikutei Efraim Penzieri”; Prianti, “Akhilah.” 26 Deuteronomy 8:3. 27 Einminish/ein beminish, according to the Rabbi Aryeh Tepliker and Korman manuscripts. The meaning is a mixture. 28 Literally, ‘the residual blood,’ the blood that remains in the limbs after a slaughtered animal is bled. See m. Keritot 5:1. 29 In accordance with the manuscript of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias and other manuscripts.



“The Story of the Bread”: Rabbi Naftali’s manuscript and other manuscripts 

 37

When he emerged from there, he saw a new world, and he awoke. And just as it is the way that when a person has dreamed something good and he immerses his thought in it, then when he awakens it appears to him that he literally has what he had dreamt about, so too when he awoke the world appeared to him literally completely new. And the table was already properly arranged, and the bread was placed upon the table, and he went to wash [his hands]. And he recited the blessing “on the washing of the hands,” and he dried his hands and he came to the table. And [now] he saw that there was no bread there at all–instead, something like a basket of mixed letters in disorder is placed there. And he was concerned that he had recited a blessing in vain. And his grandfather came to him [as he was] in a waking [state] and said to him, “Do not be concerned. Recite the blessing on the bread, for the blessing pertains to this.” And he recited the blessing and ate the bread, and the entire time that he saw the letters he ate. And he even gathered the crumbs that crumbled from the bread and ate them–because everything was letters–until he ate the entire bread with the crumbs. Afterwards, he opened his mouth and those letters emerged arranged in combinations: Alefyod-alef alef-hey etc., lamed-yod-lamed-alef, etc.: [the acronyms for] “I am the Lord your God Who took you out, etc. You shall have no other gods, etc.”30 until the end of all of the Ten Commandments. And in this [Decalogue,] he saw the entire Torah, and every generation and its interpreters, every generation and its leaders, and all that a seasoned student will in the future innovate. And [after Rabbi Nachman finished telling this story, the Hasidim who had heard it] asked him if that man, [the protagonist of the story,] is nearby or far away. And he replied, “You want to inquire and ask. If you want to ask, I will deny myself entirely.” And afterwards, he said, “There is one that is two, and there are two that are one. When he is here, he is there as well, etc.” And he commanded [his listeners] to review this story. And he said that “this story will be needed for he who is here with us today and for he who is not here.31 Be aware of what will come of this story after time has passed.” And he cautioned [them] not to tell it to an outsider. “If you tell, I will still love you, but that love will be like Chaikl32 being joyful” (meaning that [Chaikl’s] joy is actually not joy at all). He also said that all who hear [the story] are bound by a common commitment not to reveal it to an outsider.

30 Exodus 20:1–2. Regarding the various means that the transcribers of the manuscripts of Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias used to conceal the fact that this was speaking of a revelation of the Ten Commandments, see p. 352 of Appendix 3. 31 Deuteronomy 29:14. 32 See further on, footnote 146.

38 

 “The Story of the Bread”

4 The provenance of the story and its chain of transmission “That which he told when he was living in Zlatipolia” Rabbi Nachman moved from Medvedevka to Zlatipolia in 5760,33 where he lived for about two years, during which time he told this story. P’ulat HaTzaddik provides a more specific date: “after Passover of 5562.”34 However, P’ulat HaTzaddik does not note exactly when after Passover, nor does it adduce any support for this contention. Then, at the end of 5562, Rabbi Nachman left Zlatipolia and moved to Bratslav.35 Rabbi Natan became a follower of Rabbi Nachman only then,36 and thus he could not have heard what Rabbi Nachman had told in Zlatipolia. Rather, he heard this story from a second-hand source: someone named Rabbi Yudl. This is apparently Rabbi Yudl of Dashev, who was one of the first Hasidim to accept Rabbi Nachman as his rebbe, doing so when Rabbi Nachman lived in Medvedevka. Rabbi Yudl remained one of the closest followers of Rabbi Nachman throughout the latter’s life.37 The transmission of the story from Rabbi Yudl to Rabbi Natan fits our knowledge from other sources that Rabbi Natan learned about Rabbi Nachman’s utterances from Rabbi Yudl. Rabbi Yudl possessed copies of Rabbi Nachman’s early writings, and Rabbi Natan, who stayed in Rabbi Yudl’s house, read these with great eagerness.38 It may be inferred from the brief introduction to the story that Rabbi Natan did not read “The Story of the Bread” but heard it orally and then committed it to writing. It is possible that although Rabbi Nachman wanted the story to be 33 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 114 [11]), p. 112. 34 P’ulat HaTzaddik, 374, p. 207. 35 Ibid., 115 (12), p. 115. Regarding this period of Rabbi Nachman’s life, see Green, Tormented Master, pp. 101–123. 36 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 115 [12]), p. 115. 37 Rabbi Yudl, a Torah scholar and kabbalist, was a student of Rabbi Pinchas of Koretz. He moved to Medvedevka–where he served as rabbi of the community–in order to be near Rabbi Nachman. See Gidulei HaNachal, p. 37. See more about him in Chayei Moharan (“Gedulat Nora’ot Hasagato,” 263 [23]), p. 269. Regarding him and the group of Hasidim in Dashev, see Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 226–229; Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 67, 259–264; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 44– 45. For a flowery description of him and the group in Dashev, see Naveh Tzaddikim, pp. 21–25. 38 And that Sabbath, in the first summer that Moharanat–[Rabbi Natan–became a follower of Rabbi Nachman,] … Moharanat was [staying] with Rabbi Yudl, who possessed writings of the teachings that [Rabbi Nachman] had delivered before Moharanat became [his] follower. And Moharanat took these writings with him and looked at them the entire day of the holy Sabbath and almost the entire [following] night. Avaneha Barzel, 15, p. 18.



Regarding the story 

 39

remembered long into the future, even “after time passed,” it was meant not to be written but to remain a secret tradition passed on orally (unlike his discourses and other teachings of that period, which were written and preserved in writing39).

5 Regarding the story An understanding of the meaning of the plot and thematic structure of “The Story of the Bread” cannot be separated from an appreciation of the rich and multi-detailed tapestry woven throughout its length. Therefore, before discussing the overall structure of the story and its implications, I will address a number of details and unpack their meanings. Then it will be possible to more fully understand how they fit into the overall narrative mosaic.

“The Torah was given only to those who ate the manna” R. Shimon ben Yehoshua says: The Torah was given to be interpreted only by those who ate the manna, who had no need to work and engage in business. How is that? [Such a person] would sit and learn, and he would not [need to] know where his food and drink are coming from, and where [his] clothing and garments [are coming from]. Thus, the Torah was given to be interpreted only by those who ate the manna–and, secondary to them, those who ate the terumah [the priestly tithe on produce].40

In its original context, the midrashic statement that “the Torah was given to be interpreted only by those who ate the manna” means that only those who are free of the burden of earning a living and attending to their needs for survival–such as those who ate the manna in the desert and those who ate the terumah in the time of the Temple–are free to engage in learning Torah. Eating the manna represents the ability to engage solely in Torah learning.41 39 Rabbi Nachman’s teachings were written down by Rabbi Avraham Peterburger even before Rabbi Natan’s advent. See Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 223–227. 40 Midrash Tanchuma (“Parshat BeShalach,” Chapter 20). See also Yalkut Shimoni (“Parshat Shemot,” Chapter 13, Remez 226); and elsewhere. 41 The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If I simply bring Israel into [the Land], each man will immediately take his field and vineyard and cease [learning] Torah. Instead, I will place them in a desert for 40 years so that they will eat the manna and drink from the water of the well, and the Torah will be absorbed into their bodies.”

40 

 “The Story of the Bread”

However, in the kabbalistic and Hasidic tradition, eating the manna is interpreted not as removing a person’s burden of earning a living but rather as inherently representing a high spiritual level. Manna–which is the “bread from heaven”42 and “bread that the administering angels eat”43–is not merely bread. Rather, in the words of the Baal Shem Tov, “the manna is extremely spiritual,”44 and its consumption in the proper manner constitutes a high level.45 “The Story of the Bread” continues in this tradition by describing the eating of the manna as something that possesses intrinsic value–“for manna in itself is something very great”; moreover, the especial significance of the eating of the manna comes from the fact, “in particular, that in this way [the person tender in years] would receive the Torah.” Eating the manna is a preparatory stage that the protagonist must go through in order to receive the Torah. “And he recalled that the midrash quotes the verse, ‘He afflicted you and made you hungry and fed you the manna,’ and it comments that before eating the manna [the Jews] fasted on the previous day in order to scour away the food in their bellies…. And afterwards he began to be more concerned because of the final residue [of food] that still remained in him.” Avot DeRebbe Natan mentions scouring away of the food in the belly as a process that Moses underwent on Mt. Sinai before the giving of the Torah: “Natan said: Why was Moses delayed all six days as the glory rested upon him? In order to scour away all of the food and drink in his belly until he would be sanctified and comparable to the administering angels.”46 Looking through the Talmudic and midrashic literature, I did not find the midrash on the verse, “He afflicted you and made you hungry,” that the “person tender in years” recalls. However, Tola’at Yaakov, by Rabbi Meir ibn Gabbai (1480–post 1540), quotes the following passage in the name of Rabbi Moshe de Leon (1250–1305):

In this regard, Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai would say, “The Torah was given to be interpreted only by those who ate the manna–and, secondarily, those who ate the terumah.” Yalkut Shimoni, ibid. 42 Exodus 16:4. 43 b. Yoma 75b. 44 Keter Shem Tov, p. 25, commenting on the Ari’s statement that “the manna was a spiritual and important food” (Likutei Torah [“Parshat Eikev”], p. 245). 45 In this spirit, see Nachmanides’ commentary on Exodus 16:6, s.v. veda ki yeish keman, p. 125; Zohar, Part 3 (“Parshat Balak”), p. 208a; Likutei Torah (“Parshat Eikev”], pp. 245–246; Keter Shem Tov, p. 25. 46 Avot DeRebbe Natan, Appendix B to Version A, Chapter 1, s.v. Moshe nechba. And see also b. Yoma 4b; Yalkut Shimoni (“Parshat Mishpatim,” Chapter 24, Remez 362).



Regarding the story 

 41

As you know, when there is any filth in a drink that someone is drinking, he pours out the liquid until the filth is poured out. And a person who is fundamentally pure will spill out all of the drink together with the filth, and afterwards he will fill the vessel with a drink that is good and clean, without any filth whatsoever. So too regarding the impure filth in a person’s body and his food and his drink: he must reduce the blood [that contains the filth], for the filth is absorbed into [the blood], and he must attend to [the blood] until the filth leaves it. [Then,] as he sees how little [he is] eating and drinking, and [that] the blood continuously diminishes…. And the early supernal Sages (may their memory be for a blessing) stated in the midrash that when [the people of] Israel emerged from Egypt, that degenerate being was among them and remained in their bellies. And [the Sages] said: “Rabbi Abba stated: The Holy One, blessed be He, did not want to give Israel holy bread from heaven until the filth would leave them. And how would it do so? As a result of fasting. As the verse states, ‘He afflicted you and made you hungry, etc.’”47

This passage is quoted as well in Shenei Luchot HaBrit of Rabbi Yishayahu Horowitz (1565–1630).48 It may be assumed that it is in this latter source that Rabbi Nachman saw this passage, which explains the affliction as a fast whose purpose is to purify a person from the filth within him.49 As for the passage from Avot DeRebbe Natan (as found in the original and in texts where it is quoted), it does not speak of the need to purify the blood, but only of the need to purify the food in one’s belly. Apparently, the passage from Shenei Luchot HaBrit, speaking of the need to diminish the blood in which filth was absorbed, contributes to the tenor of Rabbi Nachman’s story. The protagonist’s decision to swallow a compound in order to empty his body of all remnants of food–which appears to be an extreme way to begin a fast–is slightly more understandable when viewed as a realization of the recommendation that “a person who is fundamentally pure will spill out all of the drink together with that filth” before he begins to eat the manna.50 Another passage in Shenei Luchot HaBrit links eating the manna, asceticism and the giving of the Torah, as follows. 47 Tola’at Yaakov, pp. 41a–b. 48 Shenei Luchot HaBrit (“Masekhet Ta’anit: Ohr Torah VIsod HaTa’anit VeHa’Avodah”), pp. 51b– 52a. This midrash is quoted with minor changes in Divrei Dovid in the name of the Zohar. See Divrei Dovid, 78, pp. 9b–10a. 49 Regarding the widespread Hasidic usage of Shenei Luchot HaBrit, see Piekarz, BImei Tzemichat HaChasidut, pp. 209–219. 50 It is possible that the concept of scouring the belly before eating the manna is based as well on the midrashic teaching that whoever ate the manna did not have any bowel movements, and that the miracles that God brought about with the manna took place in the intestines. See Yalkut Shimoni (“Tehillim,” Chapter 78, Remez 819).

42 

 “The Story of the Bread”

“They gathered it, each person in accordance with his eating capacity” (Exodus 16:16)…. That is [to say, each person took what he needed in order] to live–and no less and no more…. And this [concept] applies in particular to people who learn [Torah]. It is only right that, being more ascetic than the rest of the nation [of Israel], they should also engage in that asceticism in terms of not being contaminated by the unfit “food” of permitted pleasures. Instead, [they should “eat”] only that which is [necessary] for the maintenance of their soul and body and no more, as indicated by the passage dealing with the manna (as stated). And in this regard, our Sages said that “the Torah was given only to those who eat the manna” (Midrash Tanchuma, [Parshat Beshalach 20])–meaning that it is appropriate that every master of Torah be one of those who “eat the manna.” That is [to say, he should] conduct himself with the asceticism that is ascribed to those who ate the manna.51

Despite the differences between these two passages from Shenei Luchot HaBrit, they both indicate the close connection between self-mortification, eating the manna and the giving of the Torah. Both passages may serve as an ideational infrastructure for “The Story of the Bread”–which, in its description of the “person tender in years,” presents a reification of this process: one that begins with the protagonist’s self-mortification, continues with his eating of the manna and concludes with his receiving of the Torah.

Immersion in the river of fire The river of fire, mentioned in the book of Daniel (as part of the vision of the four beasts),52 is described in the Zohar as follows. And that river is described [in the words], “A river of fire was flowing and emerging from before Him” (Daniel 7:10). Souls of the tzaddikim immerse and are purified in it. And souls of the wicked are judged in it, and burn before Him like straw before fire.53 54

Immersion in the fire cleanses souls of the filth clinging to them. And when souls rise, they are cleansed in that river of fire…. So too the soul … at the time that it wishes to be cleansed of the filth within itself, it passes through the fire and is cleansed. And the fire consumes all of the filth in the soul. And the soul is cleansed and purged.55 56

51 Shenei Luchot HaBrit (“Sha’ar Ha’Otiyot”), p. 60b. 52 Daniel 7:9–10. 53 Zohar, Part 3 (“Vayikra”), p. 16b. 54 The translation is based on Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh, Volume 7, p. 85. 55 Zohar, Part 2 (“Vayakhel”), p. 211b. 56 The translation is based on Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh, Volume 6, p. 177.



Regarding the story 

 43

In Masekhet Gehennom, Rabbi Eliyahu de Vidas quotes his mentor, Rabbi Moshe Cordovero, as teaching that the purpose of immersing in the river of fire is not to purify a person from sins in general, for that is achieved by other means. Rather, its sole function is to purify the soul of the filth that clings to it due to its involvement with permissible matters. The example that he brings is the desire for eating.57 Therefore, in Rabbi Nachman’s story, the grandfather of the “person tender in years” knew full well that when it is too late for a person to fast and he has already emptied himself out as much as he can, he can still take one action–the most refined purification of all–to cleanse himself of the foods that cling to him. And that is to immerse himself in the river of fire.

Bread and letters The connection between bread and speech is signified in a number of verses that discuss the manna and define its purpose–e.g., “He fed you the manna … in order to inform you that not by bread alone does a man live but by all that emerges from the mouth of the Lord does a man live” (Deuteronomy 8:3). Although the manna is bread,58 it also “emerges from the mouth of the Lord.” This link has served as the basis of various homiletical discourses on the presence of God’s word in the manna. In this context, the words of the Ari, who saw the manna as a model for all of creation, are relevant: For all things in the world possess life-force…. And the food and bread that a person eats also have life-force. And the life-force is the speech that emerged from [the Lord’s] mouth, be He blessed, at the time of Creation, when He said, “Let the earth bring forth such and such.” … And that is the meaning of the verse, “In order to inform you that not by bread alone does a man live … but by all that emerges from the mouth of the Lord.” That is the manna, which is absolute spirituality that emerged from [God’s] mouth, be He blessed.59

The manna teaches that Godly speech exists in every physical object, giving that object life. The life-force that a person receives from the bread comes from the Divine speech that was spoken at Creation and that continues to maintain and

57 Reishit Chokhmah, Part 1 (“Sha’ar HaYir’ah”), Chapter 13, p. 156. 58 It is “bread from heaven” (Exodus 16:4) and “the bread that the Lord gave you” (ibid., 15). 59 Likutei Torah (“Parshat Eikev”), pp. 245–246 with large omissions.

44 

 “The Story of the Bread”

give life to the bread. In light of this, the letters seen by the “person tender in years” comprise the Divine speech hidden in the bread. The Ari also discusses to the ability to see the speech that exists in objects: “And all the nation saw the voices” (Exodus 20:15). They saw that which is heard. [This is] because they saw the speech, which came and kissed their mouth and said, “Accept me upon yourself.” Thus, they saw the speech–as though [it were] an angel of God. And the same pertained to [the Lord’s] speech, be he blessed, that He spoke at the time of Creation, when every phrase [regarding the creation of an entity] entered that entity, in order to constitute the life-force in it and make it grow. And since that is the case, the food that a person eats contains a physical part that sustains [his] body and also a life-force that is, in addition, a portion of the soul in the person.60

“Seeing the voices” includes seeing the Divine speech that exists in the food and in every entity.61

The blessing of the letters The Ari explains that the blessing that a person recites on a food before he eats it does not relate to its physical aspect, but to the Divine speech hidden within it, which gives it life: And this is the meaning of the verse “that not by bread alone does a man live but by all that emerges from the mouth of the Lord does a man live”–i.e., [this refers to each expression] that emerged from [the Lord’s] mouth during [the process of] Creation to bring every entity forth from the earth. That [expression of] speech enters into that food, and sustains and gives life to the person [who eats it]. Therefore, [the person] must make a blessing on the food, for by means of the blessing he arouses the life-force…. And so also conversely, when [a person] eats without a blessing, the life-force in [the food] is not awakened. And that constitutes the eating of wicked people, which is without a blessing.62

60 Ibid., p. 246. 61 The connection between eating, letters, manna and receiving the Torah raises the possibility that a connection exists between “The Story of the Bread” and the well-known Jewish custom in which a child beginning to learn Torah swallows letters of honey on cake, an egg or a board. This ceremony possesses echoes of the eating of the manna before the receiving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai (see Marcus, Tiksei Yaldut, in particular pp. 73–105). As will be shown further on, the framework of connections that Rabbi Nachman creates in “The Story of the Bread” and in his teachings involves essentially kabbalistic and Hasidic perspectives. However, the possibility cannot be rejected that this framework of connections also echoes and strengthens the meaning of the swallowing of letters prior to the giving of the Torah in the story. 62 Likutei Torah (“Parshat Eikev”), p. 246.



Regarding the story 

 45

“That not by bread alone does a man live” means that the life-force of the soul is not [attained] by means of the [physical] food, “but by all that emerges from the mouth of the Lord does a man live.” And the blessing that [a person recites and] brings forth with [his] mouth brings sparks of holiness out of the impurity.63

Thus, the blessing and its associated kavanot relate to the sparks and speech in the food more than they do to its physical aspect. This explains the episode of the blessing made in vain in “The Story of the Bread.” The “person tender in years” was concerned that he recited a blessing in vain, for after he washed his hands and recited the blessing on doing so, he realized that there was no bread to eat, but only a heap of letters lying before him. However, his grandfather reassured him that he had not recited a blessing in vain, “for the blessing pertains to this.” His grandfather’s words may be understood in light of the Ari’s words, for the essence of the blessing relates to the Divine speech that imparts life to the food, and the entire function of the blessing is to arouse the life-force and sparks of holiness hidden within it. Therefore, the blessing pertains to the letters, which emerge from the mouth of the Lord, and not to the physical bread. And since the “person tender in years” saw the letters, he could proceed to recite the blessing on the bread itself and eat the letters without fear of having recited a blessing in vain. Later on in this chapter, I will discuss Rabbi Nachman’s preliminary ideas on the letters of the alphabet as they appear in his theoretical teachings.

Crumbs of bread The story emphasizes that the “person tender in years” was not disdainful of the crumbs of bread. “And he even gathered the crumbs that crumbled from the bread and ate them–because everything was letters–until he ate the entire bread with the crumbs.” The Talmud promulgates an attitude of treating bread crumbs respectfully, warning that a person who does not gather bread crumbs but throws them away will be pursued by poverty.64 In his discourse, “Hai Gavra D’Azeil,” Rabbi Nachman connects this respect for bread crumbs to the eating of the manna: For this corresponds to the rectification of the covenant–[i.e., sexual purity. That is] because this is a prerequisite for having an income without toil, which corresponds to the manna, which [in turn] corresponds to bread from heaven (as [mentioned] above).

63 Ibid., p. 247. 64 b. Chullin 105b.

46 

 “The Story of the Bread”

[This is] because, [in regard to] income that is [attained only] with toil and difficulty, that is due to [the fact] that [a person] has not attained the “universal rectification,” which is the rectification of the covenant. [And that is] because “poverty pursues a person who casts away crumbs of bread”–[and,] how much more, “a person who casts away crumbs of the brain” (Zohar [Parshat Pinchas, p. 244]).65

Here the scrupulous concern for crumbs is broadened to apply as well to the “crumbs of the brain”–i.e., semen, the source of which, according to the zoharic perspective, is in the brain. Conversely, a person who sins by expending his seed in vain “casts away the crumbs of the brain.” Following the Zohar, Rabbi Nachman connects scrupulous care for the crumbs of the brain–i.e., rectifying the covenant–to the manna, “bread from heaven.” Rectifying the covenant makes possible “income without toil,” the opposite of poverty, These words of Rabbi Nachman open up the possibility of viewing the bread and bread crumbs in the story as representing not only the desire for food but sexual desire as well. This approach is supported by the fact that the Talmudic sages interpreted three verses about bread–“If He will give me bread to eat” (Genesis 28:20), “Except for the bread that he eats” (Genesis 39:6) and “Hidden bread is sweet” (Proverbs 9:17)–as allusions to sexuality.66 This expansion of the realms of abstention and proper eating fits in as well with the fact that the presence of the manna preceded the giving of the Torah–as did the command, “Do not approach the woman” (Exodus 19:15), which was part of the preparation for receiving the Torah at Mt. Sinai, that being the most prominent example of the need for abstention as a prerequisite for receiving the Torah.67

“And he saw in this the entire Torah and every generation and its interpreters, every generation and its leaders and all that a seasoned student will in the future innovate” The idea that it is possible to perceive the entire Torah in the Ten Commandments harmonizes with the concept that the Ten Commandments contain the entire 65 Likutei Moharan I 29:5. See also ibid. 11:4. 66 b. Nedarim 91b; b. Sanhedrin 75a; Bereishit Rabbah (Mirkin) 70:4; Yalkut Shimoni (“Parshat Bereishit,” Chapter 39, Remez 145). 67 Certain aspects of the connection in Bratslav Hasidism between asceticism and the ability to attain mystical Torah insights are discussed in Wolfson’s essay, “The cut that binds.” For an analysis of the meaning of the letters in the story as part of Rabbi Nachman’s overall view on the role of the tongue and the lips and its link to the rectification of the covenant, see Shore, “Letters of desire,” pp. 376–378.



Regarding the story 

 47

Torah within themselves. This conception is found in Sefer HaBahir–“And the 613 mitzvot are included in the totality of these ten”68–and is widespread in the kabbalistic and Hasidic literature.69 The Talmud and midrashim teach that God showed Moses (as He had shown Adam before him) “every generation and its interpreters … every generation and its leaders.”70 In addition, all “that a seasoned student will in the future innovate” was already told to Moses on Mt. Sinai.71 The Talmud states that when Moses rose to the heights to receive the Torah, God showed him Rabbi Akiva’s study hall, where Rabbi Akiva was interpreting “heaps upon heaps” of halachah. Hearing these novel interpretations, Moses grew disheartened, for he himself did not understand them. But when he was told that the source of Rabbi Akiva’s interpretations was “the halachah given to Moses at Sinai,” his equanimity was restored.72 The process of receiving the Torah at Sinai included Moses’ vision of the future, “each generation and its interpreters,” and the incorporation of all future Torah insights into the words of Moses–into the Torah of Moses.

68 Sefer HaBahir, 124, p. 55. And Rashi teaches that “all 613 commandments are [to be found] within the Ten Commandments” (Rashi on Exodus 24:12). 69 For example, see Avodat HaKodesh, Part 1, Chapter 21, p. 99; Sefer HaPeliah, p. 24b; Shenei Luchot HaBrit (“Masekhet Shavuot: Perek Torah Ohr” [4]), p. 34a; Sefat Emet (“Parshat Vayikra,” Passover 5647, s.v. b’inyan cheshbon), p. 80. 70 “This teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Adam each generation and its interpreters, each generation and its communal heads, each generation and its leaders” (Avot DeRebbe Natan, Version A, Chapter 31, s.v. b’asarah ma’amarot). And regarding Moses, “The Holy One, blessed be He, looked to the limits of Moses’ awareness and He showed him each generation and its sages, each generation and its prophets, each generation and its interpreters” (Seder Eliyahu Zuta, 6); and similarly, “R. Yehoshua of Sakhnin said in the name of R. Levi that this teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Moses each generation and its sages, each generation and its men of understanding, each generation and its interpreters” (Vayikra Rabbah 26:7, s.v. mah ketiv). And there are other, similar formulations. 71 The phrase used in the Talmud and in the midrashim is “every ruling that a seasoned student will in the future adjudicate before his rabbi” (j. Megillah 4:1; j. Peah 2:4). Some versions have will … say (Vayikra Rabbah 22:1). But in later generations the language was changed to will innovate, including the Jerusalem Talmud and the midrashim. See for example Chiddushei HaRan (Eruvin, p. 15b); Toldot Ya’akov Yosef (“Parshat Vayakhel,” 2), p. 249; and also Shenei Luchot HaBrit (“B’Asarah Ma’amarot: HaMa’amar HaSheni” [4]), p. 31b. It is possible that this phraseology resulted from a blending of the language of the Jerusalem Talmud (ibid.) and the language of the Babylonian Talmud in Megillah 19b. 72 b. Menachot 29b.

48 

 “The Story of the Bread”

6 The autobiographical element “There is a person tender in years” In contrast to the way that many stories begin–which is to say, with a phrase in the past tense (among them the openings to the stories that Rabbi Nachman himself told and that were gathered in Sefer Ma’asiyot–e.g., “The story of a king who had…,”73 “Once there was a king…,”74 “One time there was a master of prayer”75)–“The Story of the Bread” opens in the present tense: “There is a person tender in years.” This unusual opening gives the impression that the story is not speaking of a figure from the past but of an actual “person tender in years.” And this sentence thus raises the question: Who is he? Various sources in the Bratslavian literature apply this phrase to Rabbi Nachman. One of these sources describes how Rabbi Yudl became Rabbi Nachman’s follower: “And that Rabbi Yudl … was very learned, also a kabbalist and elderly, at the time that he grew close to [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing), and [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) was then tender in years.”76 Also, in the story of Rabbi Nachman’s journey to the land of Israel, he was accompanied by a Hasid, who at one point met a friend along the way. When this friend asked him, “What are you doing here?” he replied, “I am traveling with this person tender in years to the Holy Land.”77 A third source contains a number of elements that support the identification of the “person tender in years” with Rabbi Nachman: I heard Rabbi Yudl (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing) say that he heard [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) boast that he is extraordinarily novel in regard to the breaking of desires: one cannot find that a person as tender in years as he is should so completely break all [of his] desires. [This is] because one can find a number of tzaddikim who left [their] desires behind, but they did not leave [them] entirely behind until they reached their old age. And he gave the example of a number of great tzaddikim, and he said that he knows that they did not leave [their] desires behind until they grew old.

73 Opening sentence of the first story in Sipurei Ma’asiyot, “The Story of the Lost Princess.” 74 Opening sentence of the fourth story in Sipurei Ma’asiyot, “The Story of the King Who Decreed Forced Conversion.” 75 Opening sentence of the twelfth story in Sipurei Ma’asiyot, “The Story of the Master of Prayer.” 76 Chayei Moharan Hamenukad (“Avodat Hashem,” 611 [3]), pp. 370–371. 77 Shivchei Haran, 9, p. 41.



The autobiographical element 

 49

“But that a person tender in years such as myself, in the days of youth and childhood, should literally break all of [his] desires as much as I did–that is not at all to be found.”78

In this last quotation, Rabbi Nachman calls himself “a person tender in years,” and the one who testifies to that is the same Rabbi Yudl who heard Rabbi Nachman tell the story about “the person tender in years.” Also, Rabbi Nachman’s description of himself as engaging intensively in breaking his desires and as having achieved unique attainments in this area resonate strongly to the prominent role of fasting and self-affliction in “The Story of the Bread.” And the especial importance of these attainments of Rabbi Nachman is due to the fact that they occurred when he was “a person tender in years.”

“His grandfather was a very great tzaddik” As is well-known, Rabbi Nachman was the great-grandson of the Baal Shem Tov. The Hebrew word for ‘grandfather,’ zakein, may also be applied to a great-grandfather. Thus Rabbi Nachman’s mother is recorded as having said to him, “‘My son, when will you go to your zakein, the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing)?’–i.e., [when will you go] to his holy grave?”79 And similarly Rabbi Nachman was told in a dream about “your zakein, the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing).”80 It is therefore reasonable to postulate that in “The Story of the Bread” the “grandfather” of the person “tender in years”–a grandfather described as being a “very great tzaddik”–is the Baal Shem Tov.

Context Apparently, the author of Chayei Moharan too identified the “person tender in years” as Rabbi Nachman and the “grandfather” as the Baal Shem Tov, as indicated by his placement of “The Story of the Bread” in Chayei Moharan (as it appears in the manuscript). As noted earlier, “The Story of the Bread” precedes Passage 12. Passage 12 begins by describing Rabbi Nachman’s tormented youthful struggle with the desire for food. His attempt to liberate himself entirely from this desire fails, and he chooses a more moderate strategy to contend with the desire for eating. 78 Sichot Haran, 171, p. 216. 79 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Nesiato L’Eretz Yisrael,” 129 [1]), p. 128. 80 Ibid. (“Sipurim Chadashim,” 91 [11]), p. 86.

50 

 “The Story of the Bread”

An additional turning point is reached as a result of his aspiration to attain a revelation of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Rabbi Nachman promises that if God fulfills his request to see the patriarchs, he will undertake to cast away his desire for eating entirely. The narrative then continues as follows. [Rabbi Nachman’s] grandfather, the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing), came to him in a dream and quoted to him the verse, “And I will provide grass in your field for your animals,”81 and he awoke. And it was wondrous in his eyes: What connection was there between this verse and what he had asked for? And it occurred to him that the Tikunim state that [the Hebrew word for] ‘grass,’ eisev, is [composed of] the letters ayin, beit [and] shin. [The first two letters,] ayin bet, [comprise the acronym of the term,] bat ayin, [the ‘pupil of the eye.’ And the letter] shin, [which has three prongs, alludes to] the three patriarchs.82 And [the meaning of] that is, “If you want to see the patriarchs, it is only possible for you [to do so] if ‘in your field for your animals.’ [The Hebrew word for ‘your field,’ sadeh, may be read as shadeid, ‘shatter.’] You must shatter [your] animalistic desire for eating.” And [so] he cast away that desire as well.83

At this stage, the following note appears: “And [Rabbi Nachman] said that this narrative [about his struggle with the desire for food] is related to ‘The Story of Receiving the Torah’ (as [mentioned] above).” And that is followed by an explanatory gloss: “In the manuscript of Chayei Moharan, this note is preceded by [the text of] ‘The Story of Receiving the Torah’ (which is [another name for] ‘The Story of the Bread’). And that being the case, you may understand the term, ‘as [mentioned] above.’” And indeed there is a close link between the two stories. In both, a person afflicts and mortifies himself without “compassion on himself” in the realm of eating in order to attain a vision.84 In both, the central figure is a youth “tender in years,” and the heavenly teacher who guides him is his “grandfather” (identified explicitly in Passage 12 as the Baal Shem Tov). Linguistically as well, a similarity of terms between the two stories implies that the “grandfather” in “The Story of the Bread” is the Baal Shem Tov. Passage 12 states, “[Rabbi Nachman’s] 81 Deuteronomy 11:15. 82 Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 21), p. 62b; Zohar, Part 1 (“Parshat Bereishit”), p. 25b. 83 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Sipurim Chadashim,” 92 [12]), pp. 88–89. 84 The characterization of the person “tender in years” as having “no compassion on himself” recalls the following description of Rabbi Nachman’s youthful self-mortifications. He would fast a very great deal, and a few times he fasted from Sabbath to Sabbath. And all [of this occurred] in the days of his youth, literally before he was 20 years old. And sometimes he fasted from Sabbath to Sabbath two times in a row. And although he was “a child of delights” (Jeremiah 31:19) and grew up pampered and he was a very delicate person, nevertheless he did not have any mercy on himself at all, and he fasted and mortified himself a great deal.” Shivchei Haran, 9, pp. 10–11; my emphasis (Zvi Mark)



The autobiographical element 

 51

grandfather, the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing), came to him in a dream,” and “The Story of the Bread” tells that “his grandfather came again in a dream.” Finally, in both stories the grandfather conveys his revelations in a mysterious, oracular style that requires subsequent explanation. A paragraph inserted by the transcriber following Passage 12 reinforces the identification of the “grandfather” with the Baal Shem Tov. The transcriber said: I heard that the rabbi, Rabbi Nissan Kolir, one of the great followers of the rabbi, the tzaddik, the holy Rabbi Borukh (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing), told the Maggid of Tirhavitze (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing) that one time he came to the holy rabbi, Rabbi Borukh (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing), and saw that he was very sad. And he asked him, “What is the matter?” And he answered him that a few occasions had [already] passed in which he had not seen the Baal Shem Tov (may the memory of a tzaddik and holy person be for a blessing), and that whenever he came to [the Baal Shem Tov’s] grave he did not find him. “And now I saw him, and I asked him, ‘What is this about?’ And he answered me that he is with Rabbi Nachman.” And [Rabbi Borukh] said this in these words [in Yiddish]: “Er hat zikh far klibn tzu R. Nachmenen–He had bound himself to Rabbi Nachman.”85

The apparent purpose of this paragraph inserted by the transcriber is to provide the testimony of an authoritative figure (Rabbi Borukh) that the Baal Shem Tov had the custom of revealing himself to Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Borukh of Mezhibozh, who was in an ongoing state of tension–if not bitter controversy–with Rabbi Nachman, and who saw himself as the Baal Shem Tov’s principal heir,86 was forced to testify sadly that the Baal Shem Tov was now with Rabbi Nachman. This testimony supports Rabbi Nachman’s revelation of the Baal Shem Tov that occurs in conjunction with his desire for a vision of the patriarchs; moreover, it appears to support the veracity of the repeated revelations of the Baal Shem Tov that occur in “The Story of the Bread,” and the claim there that “he had already seen this grandfather of his a number of times, and everything had been true.”87

85 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Sipurim Chadashim,” 92 [12]), pp. 88–89. 86 Rabbi Borukh was the grandson of the Baal Shem Tov and uncle of Rabbi Nachman. Regarding Rabbi Borukh and the tangled relations between him and Rabbi Nachman, see Green, Tormented Master, pp. 2–30, 94–98, 103–104. 87 There are descriptions of additional incidents in which Rabbi Nachman attained a revelation of the Baal Shem Tov; see for instance Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Nesiato L’Eretz Yisrael,” 129 [1]), p. 128.

52 

 “The Story of the Bread”

All of this indicates that the author of Chayei Moharan placed “The Story of the Bread” before Passage 12 because he assumed that the “person tender in years” is Rabbi Nachman and “his grandfather” is the Baal Shem Tov.

7 “Like Moses”88 In the beginning of “The Story of the Bread,” the various stages through which the “person tender in years”–i.e., Rabbi Nachman–passes seem to parallel the stages through which the children of Israel passed on their way to receiving the Torah (such as fasting and eating the manna). The continuation of the story indicates a process that the “person tender in years” undergoes that involves the reconstruction and renewal of the revelations that Moses experienced when he rose to the heights to receive the Torah. According to “The Story of the Bread,” Rabbi Nachman attained a vision of how the oral Torah would develop until the end of all generations, such that everything that any seasoned student will innovate in the future was told to him in Zlatipolia while he was still “tender in years.” The pinnacle that Rabbi Nachman reached was the prophetic re-proclamation of the Ten Commandments, indicating a new giving of the Torah. As noted earlier, Rabbi Nachman told this story “after Passover.” How long after Passover is not related. It might have been in the following month, Iyar–the month in which the manna began to fall for the children of Israel.89 However, one might speculate that the most fitting time for such an event would be Shavuot, 88 Deuteronomy 34:10. The Zohar presents a skein of parallels between the figure of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and the figure of Moses, in some of which Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai is superior to Moses. Regarding this and regarding the midrashic sources with this perspective, see Huss, “Chakham adif minavi.” Regarding Rabbi Abraham Abulafia’s image of himself as Moses-Messiah and how that related to his prophetic world, see Idel, Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah, pp. 50–51. Regarding the self-image of the author of the Tikunei Zohar, see Goldreich, “Birurim.” Regarding the view that the “soul of Moses” is revealed and speaks from the throat of the Hasidic tzaddikim, see Piekarz, HaHanhagah HaChasidit, pp. 18–22. Regarding Rabbi Nachman’s connection to the figures of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and Moses, and regarding the Bratslavian view of the connection between Moses and the messiah, see Green, Tormented Master, pp. 117–119, 185–186, 193, 348–349, and in particular 201–204, where Green deals with the view that Rabbi Nachman is the new Moses. For more about the spiritual levels of Moses and Rabbi Nachman, see Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” pp.  238–248; Mondshine, “Al ‘Hatikun haklali,’” p.  199, note 5; Liebes, “Magamot becheiker hachasidut,” p. 226; Mark, Mysticism and Madness, p. 21 and note 104, and pp. 31–32. 89 t. Sotah (Lieberman) 11:5.



“Like Moses” 

 53

the holiday that commemorates the giving of the Torah.90 Further on, it will be seen that there is circumstantial–although indirect–support for this conjecture. However, before returning to discuss this revelation of the Torah that occurred in Zlatipolia, I will address another episode, one that occurred a number of years later in Bratslav on Yom Kippur of 5567, after a conflagration damaged Rabbi Nachman’s house.

That Yom Kippur And then, at the end of Yom Kippur [of 5567, Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) said that on that Yom Kippur he had wanted to bring something about [with the help of] the Lord, be He blessed, etc. And he had [composed and] written down a number of arguments [to present before the Lord] regarding this on a number of sheets of paper. “And I put everything into excellent order. However, because of the fire, the matter was frustrated.” And also, after [Rabbi Nachman] came from Lemberg [in 5568], he spoke of this matter, and his words implied that after he had wanted to bring this about on Yom Kippur, there was subsequent great opposition to him from above, resulting in the illness and sufferings that he underwent and that he is still undergoing. And he said, “Although my intent was certainly for the sake of heaven, nevertheless, etc.” And he then told the story of the son of the rabbi of Shepetovka,91 who was sick and knew that this was because of a sin that he [had committed in which he had] compromised his father’s honor. But nevertheless he understood in his heart that he did not regret, etc. And [Rabbi Nachman] told this in regard to himself: that although he knew that his suffering and illness were due to [that which was mentioned] above, he nevertheless had no regret in his heart.92

What did Rabbi Nachman want to bring about that aroused a heavenly opposition so harsh that he was punished with tuberculosis–a disease that, he recognized,

90 Regarding the mystical nature of the holiday of Shavuot and its being a time well-suited for revelations, see Elior, The Three Temples, pp. 153–164; Liebes, “Hamoshiach shel haZohar,” pp. 208–211. Moshe Idel speaks about a tradition regarding the possibility of experiencing the presence of the Shekhinah on Shavuot–a tradition generally known for its stories of the revelations vouchsafed to Rabbis Yosef Caro and Shlomo Alkabetz, but on that also has a recognizable presence in Hasidism, as in the words and experiences of Rabbis Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev, Tzvi Hirsch of Zhiditzov and Yitzchak of Safrin (Idel, Kabbalah: New Perspectives pp. 84–86). 91 The reference is apparently to Rabbi Yaakov Shimshon, the judicial authority (av beit din) of the community of Shepetovka. 92 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Nesiato LeNavritsh,” 151 [1]), pp. 141–142.

54 

 “The Story of the Bread”

would result in his death?93 What was the sin and blemish, concealed by the term “etc.,” that resulted in Rabbi Nachman’s punishment? And why, two years later, after he returned from Lemberg and was already apprised of that sin and punishment, did Rabbi Nachman not experience regret? And why was the decision made to suppress the most crucial part of the story? There are scholars who have seen in this episode of Rabbi Nachman “a last, desperate attempt to force the hand of heaven and bring about the redemption,” and that “Nachman was deeply aware of the tragic character of his brief messianic career. He had faced a terrible test, and had suffered its consequences.”94 It appears to me that the suppressed passage indicated by the “etc.” in Chayei Moharan can clarify this issue. The suppressed passage, as published in Yemei HaTla’ot, reads as follows: “That is to say that [Rabbi Nachman] wanted the Lord, be He blessed, to return and tell him the Torah as [He had placed it] before Moses our rabbi, peace be upon him.”95 This fragment reveals what the publishers were afraid to make public: that Rabbi Nachman had attempted to emulate Moses, so that God would again proclaim the Torah that He had proclaimed on Mt. Sinai– this time, to Rabbi Nachman in Bratslav. This attempt of Rabbi Nachman was not only presumptuous and daring but apparently a sinful act of interdicted “breaking through to the Lord,” an act that challenged the inviolate status of Moses’ spiritual superiority, which is a basic axiom of traditional Jewish culture. Moses is uniquely superior to all of the prophets and mystics–of Judaism and of other religions–and his attainments are supremely greater than theirs, both as a human being and as the purveyor of the “Torah of Moses.” A verse testifies that “no prophet stood in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face” (Deuteronomy 34:10), and every morning before prayer, a pious Jew testifies that “there did not arise in Israel any other like Moses, a prophet who gazed upon His image.”96 This perspective, established by

93 See Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 83–84 (in the Hebrew edition only); Green, Tormented Master, p. 268, note 19. 94 Green, Tormented Master, p.  212. This attribution of a messianic meaning to Rabbi Nachman’s activity comes from Green’s overall view–one that has much to commend it–regarding the messianic tension in which Rabbi Nachman was immersed in the period under discussion; see Green, ibid., pp. 182–220. Also, Rabbi Nachman’s activity on that Yom Kippur may be connected to messianism insofar as there is a connection between the figure of Moses and the figure of the messiah; see Green, ibid., pp. 118–121. 95 Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), p. 194. 96 From the religious poem (piyut), Yigdal, recited before the morning blessings, based upon Maimonides’ 13 Principles.



“Like Moses” 

 55

the Jewish sages,97 is shared equally by kabbalistic and philosophical literature.98 And in the most practical sense, it also has a halachic application, for the Tur and Shulchan Arukh state that any person who identifies himself with Moses is liable to flogging (Yoreh Deah 242:36). This halachic aspect is only a fragmentary expression of the explicit prohibition in the written Torah against breaking through to the Lord, in the context of Moses’ ascent to Mt. Sinai. “The Lord descended upon Mt. Sinai upon the top of the mountain, and the Lord called to Moses to the top of the mountain, and Moses went up. And the Lord said to Moses: Descend, testify to the nation lest they break through to the Lord and see, and a great many of [the nation] will fall” (Exodus 19:20–21). “Breaking through to the Lord” is an attempt to ascend Mt. Sinai together with Moses. Rabbi Nachman knew that the judgment passed against those who would break through to the Lord–“although [their] intent was certainly for the sake of heaven, nevertheless…”–had been explicitly stated: “whoever touches the mountain will surely die” (Exodus 19:12). He understood his sin and the punishment that he had incurred: a person who attempts to ascend the mountain so that God will tell him the Torah “as [He had placed it] before Moses” is liable to “fall” and “surely die.” Therefore, it was clear to Rabbi Nachman that his sufferings, disease and approaching death were the price that he was paying for his attempt to rise and break through to the spiritual peaks that only Moses had attained. Rabbi Nachman’s choice of Yom Kippur as the proper day to do this was not arbitrary: Yom Kippur is, according to the Talmudic sages’ reckoning, the day on which Moses finished learning the Torah from God on Mt. Sinai. On that day, God gave Moses the second set of tablets, upon which the Ten Commandments are carved. As Pirkei DeRebbe Eliezer states: “For 40 days, Moses interpreted the words of Torah and analyzed its letters, and after 40 days he took the Torah and descended on the tenth of the month–[i.e.,] on Yom Kippur–and he bequeathed it to the children of Israel.”99 Yom Kippur is therefore the day on which the Jews received the Ten Commandments at Sinai, and it is thus an appropriate day for receiving the Torah. Also, the mitzvah that characterizes this day–“And you shall afflict your souls” (Leviticus 16:29) (which includes refraining from food and 97 For example, the Talmudic sages state that “all of the prophets looked through an unclear lens, whereas Moses our rabbi looked through a clear lens” (b. Yevamot 49b). 98 From Maimonides’ writings, see: Peirush HaMishnayot (Sanhedrin 10:1, “HaYesod HaShevi’i”); ibid. (“Hakdamah LeMasekhet Avot,” end of Chapter 7); Mishneh Torah (“Hilkhot Yesodei HaTorah,” 7:6); Guide of the Perplexed 2:35, pp. 367–369. Regarding Moses’ status in kabbalah, see “Moshe BeKabbalah” in the entry “Moshe,” Ensiklopi­ diah Ivrit, Volume 23, columns 530–531. And see as well Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p.  244; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 117–121. 99 Pirkei DeRebbe Eliezer, Chapter 46, p. 96.

56 

 “The Story of the Bread”

sexual relations)–suits the preparation for receiving the Torah. This is in accordance with the above-mentioned midrash that reads the first part of the verse, “He afflicted you” as the preparation for the following clause, “and fed you the manna,” which in turn prepares a person for receiving the Torah, as so emphatically communicated in “The Story of the Bread.” Rabbi Nachman’s activity on Yom Kippur of 5567 (including his writing of entire pages associated with that activity), about five years after he told “The Story of the Bread”, and his return to this topic two years after that, following his return from Lemberg, indicate that the presumption and holy daring that appeared in “The Story of the Bread” should not be seen as the result of a Godly fire that had burned in the days of Rabbi Nachman’s youth but that had died down afterwards. Rather, it expressed a permanent spiritual yearning impressed deep in Rabbi Nachman’s soul. Thus, even years later, when Rabbi Nachman was aware of the price that he was continuing to pay for this yearning, he was not deterred and he had no regrets.100 The suppressed statement from Chayei Moharan that Rabbi Nachman’s activity on that Yom Kippur constituted a failed attempt that God “return and tell him the Torah as [He had placed it] before Moses our teacher, peace be upon him,” might seem surprising. Previously, as “The Story of the Bread” relates, while Rabbi Nachman was still “tender in years” in Zlatipolia he had eaten manna and received a revelation that included the Ten Commandments, the entire Torah and all that a seasoned student will innovate. That being the case, he had already succeeded in receiving the Torah like Moses. What then was Rabbi Nachman seeking now–and why was he punished? One possible explanation is that although Rabbi Nachman had passed the first test of receiving the Torah like Moses, he did not afterwards feel that he had attained his ultimate goal. It may be that the yearning to learn Torah directly from God, to thus be renewed and experience ongoing revelation, continued to throb within him repeatedly. This explanation is apposite to Rabbi Nachman’s personality. However, it fails to explain why he suffered severe heavenly opposition, which expressed itself in the heavy price of illness and suffering, simply for attempting (unsuccessfully) to reprise a revelation that he had already achieved–one that had occurred not at

100 In other contexts as well, Rabbi Nachman felt obligated to continue and engage in various activities that resulted in heaven exacting a heavy price, including the death of his family members. Conversely, there were also incidents in which Rabbi Nachman was deterred by the severe penalty, such as the episode of the burnt book. See Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 200–205; Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 217–223.



“Like Moses” 

 57

his initiative and, moreover, which had apparently been appropriate to the level he was on. A more precise analysis of Rabbi Nachman’s yearning that “the Lord, be He blessed, … return and tell him the Torah as [He had placed it] before Moses our rabbi, peace be upon him,” raises additional possibility. An important, decisive and central component in the revelation that Moses attained at the time of the original giving of the Torah was lacking at the time of the giving of the Torah in Zlatipolia: the public aspect. At Sinai, the Torah was given and the Ten Commandments were pronounced in the presence of the nation, when “all the nation saw the voices.”101 The communal nature of this event is perhaps the most crucial factor that kept Moses’ revelation on Mt. Sinai from being just one prophecy among tens of thousands, and it made that giving of the Torah the most important constitutive event in the history of the Jewish nation. The Jewish sages of the Middle Ages emphasized that the Torah of Moses was unique in that it was not given as a personal revelation to a specific individual–great and important though he may be–but as a public revelation to an entire nation. The entire nation saw the voices, and recognized that Moses attained prophecy and that through him the Torah was given to Israel. The importance of the public nature of the event is emphasized in the final verses of the Pentateuch: “And no other prophet like Moses arose in Israel, whom the Lord knew face to face … and all of the great awe, which Moses performed before the eyes of all Israel.”102 Moses’ prophecy was revealed to all, and this exposure made it unique among all of the genuine prophecies of the true prophets across the generations.103 It is therefore possible that Rabbi Nachman’s activity on Yom Kippur of 5567, whose purpose was that “the Lord, be He blessed, … [would] return and tell him the Torah as [He had placed it] before Moses our rabbi, peace be upon him,” was not an attempt to reprise the personal revelation that he had earlier attained in Zlatipolia, but an endeavor to achieve a new revelation that would occur in the presence of the Jewish people, as had occurred at Mt. Sinai. On a personal level, Rabbi Nachman had already attained what he needed to attain. But that was an entirely secret revelation. The nation had neither seen the letters nor heard the combinations of the Ten Commandments that emerged from his mouth. Therefore, Rabbi Nachman wanted “the Lord, be He blessed, … [to] return and tell him the Torah” exactly “as [He had placed it] before Moses our rabbi, peace be upon him”–i.e., before the eyes of all Israel. 101 Exodus 20:15. 102 Deuteronomy 34:10, 12. 103 For an example, see Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi, HaKuzari, Part 3, Section 11, p. 169. And see also Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, 2:35, pp. 367–369.

58 

 “The Story of the Bread”

Such a yearning of Rabbi Nachman would perhaps be impelled by the painful realization that although he had realized high spiritual levels and powerful revelations, he had not succeeded in translating them into a capacity to influence the nation of Israel and the world as a whole. His revealed influence was limited to the circle of his close Hasidim. Outside this group, there was no appreciation or readiness to receive the Torah that he had acquired–rather, hostility, conflict and persecution.104 The gap between his self-awareness as someone who had achieved attainments as Moses had and, on the other hand, his marginal standing in the Jewish community was acute, and appeared impossible to bridge by normal means. Perhaps this gap inspired Rabbi Nachman to attempt to receive the Torah like Moses: in public, before the eyes of all Israel. And then, like a new Moses of the Jewish nation, he could succeed. The yearning for a new Mt. Sinai experience–one that is public and dramatic, astonishing and audacious–elevated the boldness that had been manifest in “The Story of the Bread” to a new height. Rabbi Nachman yearned not only for a personal and secret revelation but for a public event in which the voice of the shofar would grow ever louder, Rabbi Nachman would speak and God would answer.105 Against this background, it is relevant to note that Rabbi Nachman was demonstrably aware of a tradition stating that in the messianic future an event will occur paralleling the giving of the Torah on Mt. Sinai–an event at which God will again be revealed face to face before the entire nation, this time with even greater might. This tradition is cited in Sefer HaBrit of Rabbi Pinchas Eliyahu of Vilna: Even [in regard to] our righteous messiah (may he come quickly, in our days, and gather us from the four corners of the earth and build our holy Temple and fulfill all of the requests of our heart), it will not be fitting for him and it will not be heard of him [that he will bring a new Torah], for we have a tradition that at that time the Lord will again augment His power to reveal to us His great and awesome glory. And all flesh will see together that the mouth of the Lord will speak to us from the fire, face to face, with greater strength and greater might than had occurred on Mt. Sinai. But this will not nullify His Torah, heaven forbid, nor exchange it nor transpose it for another Torah. On the contrary, He will reveal to us the reasons for this Torah, and the secrets of secrets and mysteries of mysteries concealed and hidden from the eye of every living thing embedded in it, and we will rejoice and be glad in it and in His Torah that is now in our hands, for our holy Torah is eternal, not transitory.106

104 See Assaf, “Adayin lo nishkat hariv”; Mark, “Lamah radaf haRav miSavran.” 105 Cf. Exodus 19:19. 106 Sefer HaBrit, Part 1, Essay 20, Chapter 1, p. 374.



“Like Moses” 

 59

Sefer HaBrit cites as something received by tradition–“for we have a tradition”– the belief that a public revelation will occur in the messianic era when “all flesh shall see together,” and that this revelation will be “with greater strength and greater might than had occurred on Mt. Sinai.” And it states emphatically that this is not speaking of the receiving of a new Torah but of the revelation of the secrets of the existent Torah. Moshe Idel has recently demonstrated that the history of kabbalistic and Hasidic perspectives on the revelation of the secrets of the Torah in the messianic era is long and variegated, and it makes its presence felt as well in the work of contemporary scholars and philosophers.107 What is innovative in Sefer HaBrit is not the belief in a revelation of the secrets of the Torah in the messianic future but in a tradition that this revelation will be public, face to face, emerging from the fire, creating a historic event of revelation comparable to the giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai but with even greater force. In light of the fact that Sefer HaBrit exercised an influence on Rabbi Nachman,108 it appears reasonable to see the passage quoted above as having informed his expectations. At any rate, it is certain that Rabbi Nachman read the chapter that contains this passage, for it is possible to identify an excerpt from that chapter in Likutei Moharan.109 Rabbi Nachman deals at length with the topic of the revelation of secrets in the messianic future, and he links that revelation in particular to the figure of “Moses-Messiah.” Moses, the giver of the Torah, the first redeemer who brought Israel out of Egypt, will also be the final redeemer–for “that which was is that which will be.”110 And just as there was a revelation of Torah in the first redemption, so too will there be a revelation of Torah in the final redemption, which will be inaugurated by a tzaddik on the level of Moses-Messiah. With the help of this Torah, it will be possible to draw down the light of the Torah to all people.111

107 See Idel, “Torah chadashah.” 108 See Pierkaz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 249–252; Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 2–3. 109 See ibid., p. 2, note 9. 110 “And only Moses our rabbi is such a compassionate being. [This is] because he was a leader of Israel and he will be the leader in the future, since ‘that which was is that which will be, etc.’” (Likutei Moharan II 7:2). 111 And this is the level of the revelation of the Torah of the future. As the Zohar teaches, in the future the Torah of the Hidden Ancient One will be revealed; for the essence of receiving of the Torah comes about by means of the intellect, which is Moses-Messiah…. And a person who is on the level of Moses-Messiah can receive Torah, and he can draw the illumination of the Torah to teach other people. Likutei Moharan I 13:2

60 

 “The Story of the Bread”

Rabbi Nachman saw in the revelation of the hidden Torah an essential stage in the messianic process and in the realization of the peaceful nature of that future: And the Torah has two levels: the revealed level and the hidden level. And this hidden [level] is the future Torah of the Hidden Ancient One, which will be revealed in the messianic future. And when this Torah of the Hidden Ancient One will be revealed, there will be wondrous peace in the world: “And the wolf will dwell with the lamb and the leopard with the kid, etc. They will not do evil and will not destroy in all of My holy mountain, for the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the Lord” (Isaiah 11:6, 9).112

In light of this, it is possible that Rabbi Nachman’s attempt on Yom Kippur of 5567 to receive the Torah as had Moses involved an aspiration to attain two related aspects of the future revelation: a recipient to receive the Torah as had Moses and a Moses-Messiah who will bring wondrous peace into the world. It is possible that Rabbi Nachman felt that his receiving the Torah in a public manner as Moses had would nullify the only gap between himself and the messiah. After all, Rabbi Nachman had proclaimed that “‘all of the beneficial actions the messiah will perform for Israel, I can perform as well. The only difference is that the messiah will decree and it will be, but I’– and he stopped and said no more.”113 And a Bratslavian oral tradition preserves the original Yiddish, which makes Rabbi Nachman’s meaning more explicit: “Moshiach vet men falgn, un mir vil men nisht falgn. People will obey the messiah, but they’re not going to obey me.”114 This phraseology underscores the idea that if people obey Rabbi Nachman, there will be no difference between him and the messiah. There is no doubt that a public event in which God proclaimed the Torah before Rabbi Nachman as He had before Moses would establish Rabbi Nachman’s position as Moses-Messiah and eliminate all dispute against him and all doubts cast upon his legitimacy and authority. And then he would indeed be able to perform all of the beneficial actions that the messiah is set to perform for the people of Israel.115 This explanation elucidates why Rabbi Nachman’s activity aroused such great heavenly opposition, bringing him suffering and terrible disease. He was not attempting to reprise what he had already attained in the episode of reve112 Likutei Moharan I 33:4. For an additional reference to the revelation of secrets of the Torah in the messianic future, see Likutei Moharan I 49:6. 113 Chayei Moharan (“Gedulat Nora’ot Hasagato,” 266 [26], p. 271). 114 I heard this tradition from Rabbi Avraham Weitzhandler in the name of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Bender. Weitzhandler is the author of Siach Sarfei Kodesh, based on the talks of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Bender. 115 Regarding the link between Rabbi Nachman and the messiah, see Mark, “The Messiah as a Breslavian Tzaddik: Made in the Image of R. Nachman,” The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 65–120, and in particular pp. 66–70.



From story to discourse: “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (Likutei Moharan I 19) 

 61

lation described in “The Story of the Bread.” He was not attempting a private, personal revelation but, much more daringly, a renewed Mt. Sinai event in which he would serve as a new incarnation of Moses–Moses the receiver of the Torah and Moses the messiah–who would usher in the messianic age, when the world would be filled with the knowledge of the Lord, followed by the attainment of wondrous peace. There is therefore a great measure of justification in Green’s speculation that on Yom Kippur of 5567 Rabbi Nachman engaged in “a last, desperate attempt to force the hand of heaven and bring about the redemption”116–for, as noted earlier, in Rabbi Nachman’s teachings the figure of the messiah and the figure of Moses blend together as one. Before I finish discussing Yom Kippur of 5567, I will again note that Rabbi Nachman did not explicitly state that he had asked God to bestow the Torah upon him in a public venue. And so, although I tend to accept that this was his intent, that remains within the bounds of speculation. Ultimately Rabbi Nachman did not succeed. His work unraveled due to the difficult and fiery opposition from heaven that he encountered. His goal of being revealed publicly did not come to fruition. The climactic episode of the giving of the Torah described in “The Story of the Bread” remained intensely personal. Rabbi Nachman believed that “this story will be needed for he who is here with us today and for he who is not here,” and he even proclaimed, “Be aware of what will come of this story after time has passed.” But he understood that, despite this, the story must be kept secret, “and he cautioned [them] not to tell it to an outsider” and he even told his listeners that they were “responsible to each other not to tell it to an outsider.” Further on, in Section 10 of this chapter, I will discuss at length the cloak of secrecy that Rabbi Nachman wrapped about “The Story of the Bread,” and the ramifications of concealing the revelation that he received, as described in this story.

8 From story to discourse: “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (Likutei Moharan I 19) People find it difficult [to understand]: why must a person travel to the tzaddik to hear [Torah] from his mouth? After all, it is possible to look in books that contain words of ethical instruction!

116 Green, Tormented Master, p. 212. Regarding Rabbi Nachman as “the new Moses,” see Green, ibid., pp. 201–204.

62 

 “The Story of the Bread”

But in truth, [that experience] is very helpful, for there is a great difference between hearing from the mouth of the true tzaddik himself and hearing from the mouth of someone else who speaks in his name–[and,] how much more, from hearing [only] from the mouth of [another] person who heard from someone who heard [from the tzaddik. This is] because, each time, [the message] descends from level to level, [until it grows] far from the mouth of the tzaddik. And so there is a great difference between a person who hears [Torah] from the mouth of the tzaddik and a person who studies a book.117

Rabbi Nachman delivered the discourse, “Tefillah LeChavakkuk,” on Shavuot of 5564.118 Shavuot was one of the three annual occasions on which Rabbi Nachman obligated his Hasidim to come to him.119 It appears that some were having difficulty with this requirement, and so Rabbi Nachman found it necessary to explain the vital necessity of hearing Torah directly “from the mouth of the true tzaddik himself.” The first section of this teaching explains “the great [and] precious worth of the Holy Tongue, with which the world was created.”120 Rabbi Nachman explains that the holiness of that language is connected to sexual self-control–the “rectification of the covenant.” Only a person who sanctifies himself sexually can attain the full measure of the Holy Tongue.121 Rabbi Nachman’s words are predicated on Sefer Yetzirah’s correspondence between the covenant of circumcision and the spoken word (both called milah). These are two central realms in which a person creates. A person who attains perfection in these areas becomes a worthy partner of God in the work of Creation.122 Therefore, when a person “perfects the Holy Tongue with which the world was created, that arouses and expands the power of the letters of the Holy Tongue that exist in everything in the world, because every entity contains within itself a number of letter combinations with which that entity is created.”123 The perfection of the Holy Tongue and the ability to arouse the letters make possible a unique sort of eating and drinking: And when a person can arouse the sparks of the letters of the entire Act of Creation, which exist in every entity, then his eating and his drinking and all of his pleasures are [derived] solely from the sparks of the letters in [his] food and drink….

117 Likutei Moharan I 19:1. 118 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad, 59, p. 55. 119 And also Hanukkah and Rosh Hashanah. See Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), p. 204. 120 Likutei Moharan I 19:3. 121 Likutei Moharan I 19:3–6. 122 Liebes, Torat HaYetzirah, pp. 94–104. 123 Likutei Moharan I 19:6.



From story to discourse: “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (Likutei Moharan I 19) 

 63

And that is [alluded to in the verse, “And Boaz ate and drank,] and his heart felt good” (Ruth 3:7). [The Sages state] that [the final phrase refers to the Grace after Meals, which is called, literally,] the “Blessing of the Meal” (Zohar [Parshat Vayakhel], p. 218a; Midrash Ruth 5). [This means] that [Boaz’s] eating and drinking [derived their energy] from the sparks of the letters that exist within the food and drink. That is on the level of the Blessing of the Meal, [in the sense] that the meal is blessed as a result of the perfection of [such a person’s] Holy Tongue, for the letters that exist in everything are aroused and illuminated. And the essence of [the pleasure of] eating and drinking, as well as other pleasures, must come from there (as [mentioned] above).124

Rabbi Nachman’s words may be seen as an introduction to the Ari’s explanation that all things, and in particular food, contain the word of the Lord, and that the blessing recited over food arouses the spiritual life-force in the food.125 Rabbi Nachman terms this force “letters.”126 According to Rabbi Nachman, once a person perfects his use of language through his sexual self-control and sanctity, his eating focuses solely on the letters that maintain the existence of the food. This person does not eat the food itself, but the letters that sustain it. In addition, the pleasure that he derives from eating comes solely from the letters. Rabbi Nachman adds that this eating is in itself the equivalent of the Blessing on the Meal, in that the food is blessed by the fact that the person eating it arouses the letters hidden within it. This passage in “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” elucidates directly and specifically two details in “The Story of the Bread”: the bread that is shown to be a heap of letters and the grandfather’s reassuring words that “the blessing pertains to this,” meaning that the blessing relates to the letters. Although “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” has nothing paralleling the description of the letters in “The Story of the Bread” as “a basket of mixed letters in disorder,” a different teaching in Likutei Moharan does deal with the disorder of letters in food and drink, as well as other elements that appear in “The Story of the Bread.” “And by the word of the Lord were the heavens made” (Psalms 33:6). Therefore, sparks [from the Lord’s word] fell into every entity: [for instance,] into food and drink and clothing. And the pleasure that comes from anything–[i.e.,] food and drink–is [due to] the sparks. And the sparks are letters….

124 Ibid., 7. 125 See above in the section, “The blessing of the letters.” 126 Regarding the important role of letters and letter combinations in kabbalah and Hasidism, see above, Chapter 1, note 21.

64 

 “The Story of the Bread”

[All of this is] because, at the time of Creation, worlds fell down (as a result of the “shattering of the vessels,” as is known). And the worlds correspond to letters. And they were scattered [to become] a number of sparks. And [when a person] raises the “female waters” [by engaging in] Torah [study] and prayer, [these] sparks, [i.e.,] letters, are combined, and [with that] a world is made. And that corresponds to [the concept of] peace. [This is] because, before a person brings these sparks and letters into words of Torah [study] and prayer, they are not combined and bonded [with each other]. And [at that point] they correspond to fragment[ation] and conflict, because every spark rises against another. But when [a person] brings them into the word of holiness, that combines and bonds them…. And that is considered as though he had created them anew. And that is [the meaning of] what our rabbis (may their memory be for a blessing) said [regarding the verse,], “And say to Zion: You are My nation” (Isaiah 51:16): “Do not read [the word] ami, ‘My nation,’ [as it is vowelized,] but [read it as though it is vowelized] imi, [which means] ‘with Me’–[i.e.,] in partnership. [That is to say,] just as I create heaven and earth with My word, so you too, etc.” (Zohar [Introduction], p. 5).127

The letters–the sparks–are imbedded in foods. However, they are not combined with each other within the food. Instead, they constitute a collection of unconnected fragments. When a person eats the letters and afterwards raises and rectifies them with words of Torah and prayer, these fragments are combined and connected. And in this way he is a partner in the act of creation, for “that is considered as though he had created them anew.” This description precisely fits the process that occurs in “The Story of the Bread.” There, the “person tender in years” ate “a basket of mixed letters in disorder,” following which “he opened his mouth and those letters emerged arranged in combinations: … ‘I am the Lord your God…’ etc.” “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” goes on to state that the ability to feel the shining letters and nothing else is not the province of every individual, and not even that of the kabbalistic sages. Rather, it is a unique ability reached only by the tzaddik who has entirely broken his desires. But it is possible for a person to feel and take pleasure solely from the letter combinations– on the level of “and [Boaz] ate and he drank” (as [mentioned] above)–only if he has perfected the Holy Tongue…. Commentary128: [This is] because, by means of wisdom alone, a person can recognize the letters that are in every entity…. But even if he is such a great sage that he knows all of this clearly, recognizing the letters in everything (for which one must be extraordinarily skilled in the entire wisdom of truth, which is the wisdom of the kabbalah, and in the entire wisdom 127 Likutei Moharan I 75. The date when this teaching was delivered is not known. 128 Presumably this explanatory commentary was added by Rabbi Natan.



From story to discourse: “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (Likutei Moharan I 19) 

 65

of nature and the elements…), it may nevertheless be the case that [the pleasure of] his eating and drinking and [his other] pleasures will still derive from the body of the object and not from the spark of the letters [within it]. [That is] because [a person can only] reach the point at which all of his pleasures come solely from the letters in every entity when he attains the perfection of the Holy Tongue– i.e., when he successfully breaks the lust for sexual relations entirely and perfects the Holy Tongue so that he brings a new spark into the Holy Tongue–that is to say, into the letters in every entity. It is in particular the tzaddik who, in achieving this, attains [the following]: he feels pleasure from everything–eating and drinking and the other pleasures in the world– only from the spark of the letters in every entity. Fortunate is he!129

Sexual self-control, the ability to eat the letters and the ability to give new brightness to the Holy Tongue are all interconnected.130 Knowledge of letter combinations, the wisdom of the kabbalah and the wisdom of nature are a prerequisite– but a person rises to the level of perfection discussed here only when he succeeds in breaking his desires entirely. This provides an extensive explanation of the narrative in “The Story of the Bread.” The protagonist must engage in the spiritual work of breaking his desires in order to reach and see the letters in the bread. Only his absolute breaking of his desires–even those that are permissible131–and the attainment of absolute purification lead him to the perfection of the Holy Tongue and to the ability not only to see the letters but to eat them–and them alone. It is true that “The Story of the Bread” and “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” discuss two different desires. In “The Story of the Bread,” the “person tender in years” contends with the desire for eating, his goal being to eat the bread in holiness. “Tefillah LeChavakkuk,” on the other hand, speaks of the desire for sexual relations. However, Rabbi Nachman saw each of these two desires, which he discusses at length, as a type of inclusive desire that includes all others.132 Also, “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” teaches that breaking the desire for sexual relations constitutes 129 Likutei Moharan I 19:8. 130 Regarding fasting as a way of raising the sparks of speech and of attaining proper eating, see Likutei Moharan I 62:5. 131 This is because the desire for sexual relations includes as well permissible sexual desire. 132 And so did he act at first: his entire purpose and his entire toil were directed solely to first breaking this general desire [the desire for sexual relations]. And [so] initially he paid no attention whatsoever to breaking the desire for eating. In fact, to the contrary, initially he ate a very great deal, much more than other people. And he said that at that time he pulled all of [his] desires into the desire for eating. Shivchei Haran, 18, p. 20 Thus, the desire for eating–as well as the desire for sexuality–is an all-inclusive desire that can contain all desires.

66 

 “The Story of the Bread”

one stage in a process that leads a person to receive pleasure solely from the letters of the food that he eats. That is to say, the desire for eating is also entirely rectified and sanctified. This corresponds well with our previous conjecture that the bread and bread crumbs in “The Story of the Bread” allude to sexuality–to the rectification of the covenant–and to the idea that self-control in the areas of food and sexuality is a part of the preparation for receiving the Torah. Later on in “Tefillah LeChavakkuk,” Rabbi Nachman states that in the merit of eating the letters the tzaddik reaches a level in which the illumination of his face affects a person who looks at it: When [the tzaddik’s] face shines with this purification, then another person can see his [own] face in this [tzaddik’s] face as in a mirror, and regret [his sins] and do teshuvah (as [noted] above). That corresponds to “face to face the Lord spoke with you” (Deuteronomy 5:4). That is say, because the word of the Lord–i.e., the perfection of the Holy Tongue–is with you, [the tzaddik], as a result, [your] face sparks and shines so much that [your] face can be seen–[reflected]–in [the other person’s] face.133

A person undergoes something of the experience of Mt. Sinai when he sees the tzaddik’s face, because the person attains the level of “face to face the Lord spoke with you at the mountain out of the fire” (Deuteronomy 5:4), which describes the experience at Mt. Sinai. Further on, Rabbi Nachman develops the theme of seeing the face of the tzaddik and hearing his words as a revelation of the word of the Lord. And with this he answers the question with which he began: What is the great advantage of hearing Torah directly from the mouth of the tzaddik? And that is the difference between a person who hears from the mouth of the rabbi and [a person who hears] from the mouth of the student or [who reads] from a book. [This is] because the tzaddikim are “heroes of might, performing His word” (Psalms 103:20). [The Hebrew word for “performing” can also be translated as “constructing.”] Thus, [the tzaddikim] “construct” and build the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He–i.e., the Holy Tongue with which the world was created. This corresponds to [the Sages’ teaching,] “He took counsel with the souls of tzaddikim and created the world” (Bereishit Rabbah 8)…. [Those souls of the tzaddikim would] “construct” the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He, so that He would speak and create the world. And all of this was before creation. [And] now as well, when the tzaddikim want to hear some speech from the Holy One, blessed be He, they first construct the speech and build it. That is [to say], as a result of their good deeds they succeed in hearing words from the Holy One, blessed be He. Thus, those words are constructed and built by them.

133 Likutei Moharan I 19:9.



From story to discourse: “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (Likutei Moharan I 19) 

 67

And that is the level of “performing His word to hearken to the voice of His word.” When [the tzaddikim] want to hear speech from the Holy One, blessed be He, they first construct speech, corresponding to [the phrase,] “performing His word” (as [mentioned] above). And afterwards they hear speech from the Holy One, blessed be He, corresponding to [the phrase,] “to hearken to the voice of His word.” [That is] because with this speech the Holy One, blessed be He, speaks with them.

Rabbi Nachman builds his case step by step. First, he states that God created the world with the speech made by the tzaddikim, “who perform His word.” Rabbi Nachman then broadens this claim and states that now as well the tzaddikim build God’s world. And afterwards, they hear the speech that they themselves created and built. This interesting claim assumes as a matter of course that God speaks with the tzaddikim and that “now as well” if the tzaddikim wish to hear speech from God, they can do so. The claim is moderated by the fact that the meaning of “God’s speech” and “the tzaddik’s hearing” are not clear. Rabbi Nachman seems to view the tzaddik’s behavior itself as the speech and Divine revelation. Rabbi Nachman goes on to explain the connection between this and the importance of a person hearing directly from the tzaddik. Thus, when the tzaddik hears the speech of Torah from the mouth of the Holy One, blessed be He, [the tzaddik’s own] speech is perfected, for [his perfection of] speech is dependent upon [his] fear [of God]. And [then the tzaddik] hears the [Divine] speech, corresponding to “to hearken to the voice of His speech.” Thus, a person who hears from the mouth [of the tzaddik] himself receives speech of the perfected Holy Tongue–i.e., together with the fear [of God]…. But a person who hears from someone else is far from that perfection, because [the original speech] has already descended from its level.134

Rabbi Nachman’s explanation regarding the importance of hearing directly from the tzaddik therefore rests on a double valence. On the one hand, the tzaddik himself builds and pronounces the word of the Lord (the tzaddikim “perform His word”). But on the other hand, the Divine speech can reach perfection only when the tzaddik hears it in a state of awe (“to hearken to the voice of His speech”). Therefore, an ordinary person’s hearing of Torah that does not come via the tzaddik or that comes through an intermediary is far removed from perfected speech. When a person hears the true tzaddik–a tzaddik who has broken his desires entirely–deliver words of Torah, he hears the Divine speech directly and perfectly. 134 Ibid.

68 

 “The Story of the Bread”

That is because the tzaddik is someone “who performs His word to hearken to the voice of His speech.” That is to say, with his creativity the tzaddik builds the speech in which the voice of the Lord is heard. This apparently means that the tzaddik pronounces a new Torah that has never before been heard and spoken. And in particular his ability to create “a new spark in the Holy Tongue” and to build new speech makes it possible for his speech to be the word of the Lord and for the sight of his face to be the equivalent of “face to face the Lord spoke with you.” These ideas explain and provide a framework for understanding the passage in “The Story of the Bread” in which the “person tender in years” opens his mouth and letters emerge in permutations of the Ten Commandments. When the tzaddik has broken his desires, has seen the light of the letters and has eaten the letters (and not the physical bread), the speech that emerges from his mouth has become the word of the Lord. Then a person who hears him speak can actually hear the voice of God proclaiming, “I am the Lord your God.” In “Tefillah LeChavakkuk,” as in “The Story of the Bread,” there is no doubt that the principal figure–the true tzaddik who “succeeds in breaking the desire for sexual relations entirely”–is Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Nachman employs the term “the true tzaddik” more than once when referring to himself,135 and he previously testified that even before he broke his desire for food “he succeeded in breaking this [sexual] desire entirely.”136 To this is joined the fact that “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” was delivered to answer the question of why it is necessary to travel to the tzaddik–a practical topic for the Hasidim who traveled to hear and see Rabbi Nachman. There is therefore no doubt that the episode described in “The Story of the Bread” stands in the background of “Tefillah LeChavakkuk.” The experience described in that story is the real-life source and underpinning of this discourse, which should not be seen as mystical speculation in homiletical form but rather as a homiletical reworking of an episode, dream or vision that Rabbi Nachman had doubtless experienced in some manner two years earlier. The “person tender in years” is vigilant to keep “The Story of the Bread” secret–however, he dares teach its homiletical aspect on Shavuot. In this homily, the identity of “the true

135 See Green, Tormented Master, pp. 120–121. 136 Shivchei Haran, 16, p. 21. See also Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Yegiato VeTirchato B’Avodat Hashem,” 4–5 [233–234]), pp. 198–199. For more on the place of sexuality and on the importance of its rectification in Rabbi Nachman’s view, see Liebes, “Hatikun haklali”; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 36–40, 167–170, 179 note 60; Biale, Eros and the Jews, pp. 134–136. For more on the ability to break this desire, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 62–69 (in the Hebrew edition only).



From story to discourse: “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (Likutei Moharan I 19) 

 69

tzaddik” is not stated explicitly–however, the listeners have received enough allusions to know to whom this phrase refers. Rabbi Natan too links “The Story of the Bread” to “Tefillah LeChavakkuk.” Another story of Rabbi Nachman entitled “The Master of Prayer” describes a sect that thinks that only a person who eats little and is not sustained by ordinary human food is qualified to be king. In Likutei Halakhot, Rabbi Natan essays to explain the roots of this strange doctrine. This source of this error may be understood slightly, [as follows]. [This is] because there are true tzaddikim who are genuinely holy and who have indeed entirely broken their desire for eating, until they only eat a very small amount, and they eat that small amount with awesome holiness, to such a degree that all of their eating and gaining of sustenance is not [the same as] the food and gaining of nourishment that sustains other people. [This is] because their food corresponds to manna, which is associated with the verse, “A man has eaten the bread of the mighty ones” (Psalms 78:25). That “bread” is the food that sustains the administering angels. And it is commensurate with the food of the true tzaddikim, as indicated by the statement that “the Torah was given only to those who eat the manna” (Mekhilta [Parshat Beshalah]). And [Rabbi Nachman’s] Alef Bet Book (letter Alef, entry Akhilah 5) explains that a person who learns Torah with a pure mind is sustained by the food that the angels are sustained by, etc. And Rabbi Nachman (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing) also explains that with a great deal of hitbodedut [(speaking to God)] and yearning for the Lord, may He be blessed, a person makes souls, etc. And as a result of this, all of this person’s food will be on the level of the showbread (as explained in the teaching, “It Lan Birah BeDavra” [Likutei Moharan I 31]). And the teaching “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (ibid. 19) explains as well that when a person perfects the Holy Tongue he succeeds in guarding the covenant. As a result, all of his food and pleasure come only from the spark of the holy letters in whatever he is eating or drinking, etc. Thus, the tzaddik who attains this does not eat and drink the food and drink of other people at all. Rather, he eats and drinks holy letters, which correspond to holy souls, the inner lifeforce of the food, from which the essence of the inner life-force, etc., comes. And we have [elsewhere] discussed the awesome story about the tzaddik who attained this: who saw while he was eating that all of the bread that was placed before him was entirely [comprised of] letters, etc. Thus, there are such true great tzaddikim whose food is not at all the food of this world. And the error of that sect was derived from this.137 137 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 1 (“Orach Chaim: Hilkhot Tefillah,” 4:6), pp. 345–346.

70 

 “The Story of the Bread”

The interpretation that I have proposed regarding “The Story of the Bread” and “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” is of a piece with Rabbi Natan’s words, in which he posits a connection between the two. Seeing “The Story of the Bread” as the underpinning of “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” leads to a better understanding of an interesting passage (originally suppressed) that follows this discourse: And there is a very great difference between learning from a book and hearing from the mouth of the sage. [This is] because a book is only for memory. As the verse states, “Write this for a remembrance in the scroll” (Exodus 17:14)…. And thus our rabbis (may their memory be for a blessing) said: “Words that are transmitted orally, you are not permitted to recite from a written source” (b. Gittin 60b). And there are deeper matters, because in truth this verse–“Write this for a remembrance in a scroll” (as [noted] above)–refers to the written Torah, which must be written. (All of this I heard from [Rabbi Nachman’s] holy mouth at the time that I wrote the above teaching before him. But he did not explain this matter clearly.)138

It appears to me that seeing “The Story of the Bread” in the background of “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” sheds light on this passage. Rabbi Nachman speaks disparagingly of book learning, and praises hearing Torah directly from the mouth of a sage. The verse brought as a prooftext is referring to the written Torah, which is specifically intended to be written–as the Talmudic sages state, “Regarding words in writing, you are not permitted to say them by heart” (b. Gittin 60b). However, there are “deeper matters,” for Rabbi Nachman is indeed referring to the written Torah. In “The Story of the Bread,” the protagonist “opened his mouth and those letters emerged arranged in combinations: … ‘I am the Lord your God…’ [and] You shall have no …’ etc., until the end of all of the Ten Commandments.” And afterwards as well, on Yom Kippur of 5567, Rabbi Nachman acted with the intent that “the Lord, be He blessed, [will] return and tell him the Torah as [He had placed it] before Moses our rabbi, peace be upon him.” And the Torah that God told Moses is the written Torah. Rabbi Nachman does not want to learn this from a scroll but to hear it from God’s mouth and to then proclaim it.139 Therefore, Rabbi’s Nachman’s words indeed related to the written Torah. However Rabbi Nachman “did not explain this clearly,” preferring to leave it obscure.140 138 Likutei Moharan I, after 19, s.v. hashmatot hashayakhim latorah hazot. 139 It is possible that this is the underpinning of Rabbi Nachman’s statement that “one may be as exacting with the teachings that he wrote in his own holy words as with Scripture” (Chayei Moharan HaMenukad, [“Ma’alat Torato USfarav HaKedoshim,” 322 (23)], p.  251). And see also Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot [5693]), p. 190. 140 Later Bratslavian literature presents an additional way of moderating the problematical nature of “The Story of the Bread”: by limiting Rabbi Nachman’s receiving of the Torah to the realm



From story to discourse: “Tefillah LeChavakkuk” (Likutei Moharan I 19) 

 71

More regarding the passage from story to discourse In 5562, during the period of sefirat ha’omer between Passover and Shavuot or perhaps even on Shavuot itself, Rabbi Nachman told “The Story of the Bread,” which is also called “The Story of Receiving the Torah.” He charged his Hasidim to keep the story secret and not reveal it to anyone, and he told them to remember it well, instructing them, “Be aware of what will come of this story after time has passed.” About two years later, on Shavuot of 5564, Rabbi Nachman delivered a talk to his Hasidim whose topics and purposes were very much of a piece with “The Story of the Bread,” and which makes reference to a mystical occurrence that is similar to–if not identical with–that described in “The Story of the Bread.” However, this time it was not presented as an event that occurred in some form, on some realm of existence, but as a theoretical, homiletical discourse. The figure of the tzaddik at the center of this teaching may be understood to be Rabbi Nachman himself. But the homiletic and theoretical character of the format conceals its incredibly radical nature. Apparently, the homiletic form, resulting in a clouding and blurring of the autobiographical element, made it possible for Rabbi Nachman to deliver this sermon publicly and afterwards permit its inclusion in Likutei Moharan–something that he did not allow “The Story of the Bread.” It appears that originally a certain portion of the homiletical discourse was removed, but when the teaching was published, that elision was re-inserted at its end. This elided passage can, when clarified and accentuated, reveal the daring–a daring that rises to the level of “breaking through to the Lord”–at the core of this teaching, which describes the audacious yearning to attain a renewed of the esoteric. This approach is presented in a passage appended to Biur HaLikutim. I heard [a comment] from Rabbi Avraham regarding the 613 commandments that are alluded to in the Ten Commandments…. And in my opinion it appears from [Rabbi Nachman’s] holy words (as well as from other books of truth) that similarly [the Ten Commandments] allude to the whole of the hidden Torah–[i.e., kabbalah]–that is renewed by the mouths of the true tzaddikim in every generation and every year. This is the concept of our receiving the Torah every Shavuot and even every day, as the books of truth teach. And this also clarifies “The Story of the Bread” that appears in Chayei Moharan, as it may be understood from [Rabbi Nachman’s] holy words that in truth he was referring to the hidden, [kabbalistic aspect] of the Torah that would be given to him (about which his holy grandfather had apprised him). And afterwards the Ten Commandments emerged from his mouth (as is told there), and in this [experience] he saw everything that a seasoned student will innovate in the future–for that too constitutes the attainment of the hidden [kabbalah] in [the Ten Commandments], all of which [Rabbi Nachman] attained. Biur HaLikutim (“Hashmatot SheNimtza’u BiKhtav Yad HaMechaber B’Inyanim Shonim,” 5), pp. 217–218

72 

 “The Story of the Bread”

proclamation, mouth to mouth, face to face, of the written Torah–the Torah that was given on Sinai. After an interval of more than two years, on Yom Kippur of 5567, Rabbi Nachman again attempted to induce God to tell him the Torah as He had placed it before Moses. The record of this attempt was also elided in an attempt to conceal it. Rabbi Nachman’s relationship to this failed attempt indicates that he was well aware of the problematical nature involved in daring to attain an accomplishment equal to that of Moses, and it would be quite understandable that he and his Hasidim would wish to conceal this by a series of elisions and the imposition of a veil of secrecy. Interestingly enough, Rabbi Nachman himself cautioned more than once against excessive religious enthusiasm, which is liable to turn into “breaking through”: There is a great evil inclination in regard to [a person] bringing himself close to the Lord, be He blessed. That is to say, sometimes an excess of fervor beyond the [proper] measure comes from the evil inclination. [This is] because that is the level of “lest they break through…” (Exodus 19:21). And so, at the time of the giving of the Torah, the Lord, be He blessed, cautioned Moses: “Descend, testify to the nation lest they break through to the Lord to see” (ibid.). [This is] because [the people of] Israel were then on a high level, and it was necessary to caution them regarding the evil inclination that exists in [regard to] coming close to the Lord, be He blessed.141 At times, the equivalent of a storm wind blows within a person, and it fires him up exceedingly beyond the [proper] measure. That corresponds to breaking through, the level of “lest they break through to rise to the Lord, etc.” [This is] because “in that which is hidden from you, do not inquire” (b. Chagigah 13a), and it is forbidden for a person to “break through” to rise to the Lord [in regard to] that which is not appropriate for him on his level.142

But despite these warnings, Rabbi Nachman himself was not deterred. He did not turn back and he did not regret his attempts to rise to the Lord–attempts that had begun when he was “tender in years” and that did not cease even when he was older. An instructive note of Rabbi Avraham Chazan in the appendices to his Biur HaLikutim gives a glimpse into the way Bratslav Hasidim contended with the problem of “breaking through,” something that apparently cast a shadow over their rebbe’s behavior. He wrote, “Regarding the concern and warning against ‘breaking through,’ it appears from [Rabbi Nachman’s] holy words that because of this, all of our hope and [the tenor of] our lives is to seek and search day and

141 Likutei Moharan I 72. This teaching was delivered in Adar 5565. 142 Likutei Moharan II 9. And see also ibid., 5, and in particular Section 7.



States of consciousness: sleep, dream, vision, awakening, and wakefulness 

 73

night for the leader Moses himself, who approaches the cloud143… so that he alone might receive from there the knowledge of the Torah. And as a result of [our] seeking and searching for the place of his glory,144 everything is transformed and all good is drawn down.”145 The possibility of “breaking through” to the Lord arouses fear because only Moses was summoned to rise to the mountain of God. Paradoxically, Rabbi Avraham explains that the search for the tzaddik, who is our entire hope and life, is the search for the leader Moses himself. One may easily surmise that the tzaddik, the leader who stood before the eyes of Rabbi Avraham and whose figure and teachings he had searched for all his life, was Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav; and it was clear to Rabbi Avraham–on the basis of “The Story of the Bread” and apparently on the basis of other sources as well146–that the tzaddik Rabbi Nachman is the leader Moses, who “approaches the cloud where God is” and alone receives the Torah.

9 States of consciousness: sleep, dream, vision, awakening, and wakefulness The attempt to identify the various states of consciousness described in “The Story of the Bread” is both important and fascinating. It is difficult to grasp all of the underlying meanings in the story without clarifying which of the events took place as part of a night dream and which as part of a vision experienced in a waking state, and also to clarify whether the story took place in objective reality or solely in the realm of the mind. The story itself explicitly mentions states of alertness and dream, night vision and day vision, waking state and sleep. However, the many states of consciousness and the frequent passages between them create a lack of clarity that demands attention and careful tracking. The story opens with a short exposition that describes the age and spiritual status of the protagonist, as well as the spiritual status of his grandfather.

143 This alludes to the verse, “And the nation stood from afar and Moses approached the cloud where God was” (Exodus 20:17). And see Rabbi Nachman’s teaching on this verse in Likutei Moharan I 115. 144 This alludes to Rabbi Nachman’s teaching on the phrase, “Where is the place of His glory?” (prayerbook), that when a person searches (“where is”), then “the place of His glory” is revealed to him. See Likutei Moharan II 12. 145 Biur HaLikutim (“Hashmatot SheNimtza’u BiKhtav Yad HaMechaber B’Inyanim Shonim,” s.v. hachipus acharei hatzaddik), p. 217. 146 See above, note 88.

74 

 “The Story of the Bread”

The first stage of the narrative occurs in a dream. The protagonist’s grandfather instructs him to take heed of the foods that he will eat that day. Since, immediately afterwards, the narrative relates that “in the morning, he awoke,” it is clear that the dream occurred at night. The second stage of the narrative occurs in the morning while the protagonist is awake. His attitude to the dream is described as follows: “In the morning, he awoke. And it was already very clear to him that his dreams are true.” The protagonist’s decision to see the dream as true moves the narrative forward, causing him to wonder about the meaning of his dream, immerse in the mikveh, recite psalms and pray to God to help him understand what is required of him. Until this point, two states of consciousness–dream and wakefulness–have naturally mirrored the two phases of the day: the night is meant for sleep and dreaming, and the day for thought and action. The third stage also occurs in a dream state while the protagonist sleeps–but this time during the day. The protagonist lies down to rest and he falls asleep. His prayer is answered in that his grandfather again appears to him in a dream and explains that “they” want to give him manna and Torah. This stage concludes with the comment, “And he awoke.” The fourth stage occurs during the day, while the protagonist is awake. He fasts in order to purify himself, but is concerned that he cannot scour away the final residue of food that remains within him. The fifth stage occurs later that day, in an intermediary stage between wakefulness and full sleep: “and he dozed.”147 While the protagonist is in this state, his grandfather appears, shows him wondrous, novel matters and takes him to immerse in the river of flame. This is a confused state. It is the only instance in which the grandfather’s appearance is not accompanied by the narrator’s explanation of whether events are occurring in a dream or in a waking state, and the reader has difficulty discerning whether the grandfather has appeared while the protagonist is asleep or awake. This is also the first time that, when the grandfather is revealed, he does more than speak. Until this point, the grandfather would appear in a dream and speak to the passive protagonist. The grandfather would give him guidance and information, and after the protagonist awoke he followed his grandfather’s advice. But now his grandfather takes him on a tour, shows him wonders and takes him to immerse, and the protagonist acts in the presence of his grandfather. 147 “What is the meaning of ‘dozed’? Rav Ashi said: sleeping yet not sleeping, awake yet not awake–such that when someone calls him he answers, but he does not know how to answer rationally. And when he is reminded, he remembers” (b. Pesachim 120b).



States of consciousness: sleep, dream, vision, awakening, and wakefulness 

 75

Immediately afterwards, “he awoke.” Usually, a person is said to awaken from being fully asleep. However, the passage from dozing to a full waking state may also be described by the phrase, “he awoke.” On previous occasions, when the protagonist awoke, his passage from sleep and dream to being awake was distinct. This time, however, it is not. The narrative relates that after the protagonist has seen “a new world” in his dream, when he awakens he continues to feel that “he literally possesses what he had dreamed about…. The world appeared to him to be literally completely new.” The sense of reality that he experienced in his dream does not fade but continues to exist even after he awakens. As the narrative unfolds, the difficulty of clearly determining the protagonist’s state of consciousness continues. Thus, it is not evident whether the set table with the bread upon it is a vision or objective reality. And is the heap of letters something that may be seen by the physical eye, or only by the protagonist’s spiritual eye? At this point in the narrative, the protagonist’s grandfather reappears. This time, “his grandfather came in a waking [state].” Paradoxically, this clear assertion clouds the understanding of what is occurring and obliterates the remnants of any differentiation that still remained between dream or vision and external reality. That is because this time awakening does not restore the protagonist to normal consciousness and reality in accordance with the rules of this world, since it includes the presence of his grandfather, who is in fact no longer alive. If this is not a dream or vision, how does the protagonist see his grandfather? Did his grandfather incarnate into a tangible body of flesh and blood that anyone would be able to see, or was this a vision vouchsafed to the protagonist’s spiritual eyes while he was conscious, whereas a normal person would not be able to see it? And if so, perhaps when the protagonist washed his hands prior to his grandfather’s appearance, that was also a vision, and maybe earlier occurrences–such as the protagonist’s fasting and prayer–did not take place in the realm of objective reality either. After the protagonist eats the letters and recites the Ten Commandments, he sees every generation and its teachers, and everything that a seasoned student will innovate. This sight contains a certain amount of nullification of differentiations of time and unfolding of events: a nullification of the differences between generations, between future and present, between that which is new and that which has long existed. Implicitly, this stage is that of a spiritual vision. But since the story fails to describe a clear point at which the protagonist passes from thisworldly experience to spiritual vision, the reader cannot know when physical sight concludes and spiritual vision begins, when the protagonist’s state of being

76 

 “The Story of the Bread”

awake indicates normal consciousness of objective reality, and when his state of being awake refers to spiritual visions that eyes of flesh cannot perceive. Differentiations are gradually eradicated. The story opened in a reality in which distinctions between day and night, dream and wakefulness, vision and deed were clear and recognizable. But little by little these distinctions are blurred: at first between day and night, afterwards between dream consciousness and waking consciousness, and following that between spiritual vision and physical sight, and between present and future.

Self-purification and a new world Incidents and visions are no longer clearly differentiated in accordance with the categories of day and night, sleep and alertness, dream and waking. These categories lose their power to characterize the incidents that occur in the story. However, just as these familiar lines are blurred, there is a consolidation of a different type: of a different structure or, more precisely, of a different process. This creates a sense of different realities. The difference does not result from the passage between worlds. It is rather a difference in perspective on the other world–and this is because the change occurs within the person. And the process that creates that difference consists of a person’s sanctifying and purifying himself. Doing so leads him to experience the spiritual dimension of reality. This is evident in the analogous relationship between the protagonist’s immersion and his subsequent washing of his hands. Immersing in the river of fire represents the conclusion of the process of self-sanctification. That immersion purifies and scours the final residue of food within the protagonist. When he emerges from the river at the end of this process of self-sanctification, he sees “a new world”–a sight that does not fade even when, as he awakens, the dream melts away. Later, the protagonist sees bread and washes his hands, after which the bread appears to him as a heap of letters. This heap of letters is apparently something new. However, it is not truly different from the bread; rather, it is the core spiritual aspect of the bread, which the protagonist sees only now. The protagonist’s immersion and his washing of his hands both express the process of self-sanctification. Seeing a new world after immersing and seeing the letters after washing his hands reveal the spiritual pillars of existence to him. The eradication of differentiations has a purpose and direction. The story does not express structural and moral chaos. Rather, the protagonist’s spiritual vision exerts increasing influence upon his physical sight, until little by little, in consequence of his self-scouring and self-purification, souls and letters are



States of consciousness: sleep, dream, vision, awakening, and wakefulness 

 77

revealed to him even when he is in a normative, waking state. At no point in the narrative is dream or vision revealed to be an illusion or a reflection of physical reality. To the contrary, in the process through which the protagonist passes (and the reader together with him), the physical is revealed to be spiritual. This process–in which the protagonist first sees the bread and afterwards sees the letters that give life to the bread–occurs throughout the entire narrative reality. There is a transition from a world in which the waking and conscious morning gives the stamp of truth to dream and vision, to the reality of a world that is entirely a vision, a world in which the appearance of the protagonist’s grandfather, which clearly belongs to the world of dreams, occurs in a “waking state.” The process is an intense revelation of the fact that not by bread alone do man and the world exist, but by all that emerges from the mouth of the Lord.

Postscript to the narrative And [then the Hasidim] asked [Rabbi Nachman] if that man is nearby or far away. And he relied, “You want to inquire and ask. If you want to ask, I will deny myself entirely.” And afterwards, he said, “There is one that is two, and there are two that are one. When he is here, he is there as well, etc.”

In conversation following this narrative, Rabbi Nachman’s Hasidim attempted delicately to clarify whether the protagonist, who had succeeded in eating the manna and receiving the Ten Commandments, and in seeing and encompassing the oral Torah to the end of all generations, was “nearby.” There is no doubt that their words were expressing the assumption that there was only one candidate for the role of the protagonist, that he was nearby, and that he was Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Nachman began his response by deploring their having asked the question at all, saying, “You want to inquire and ask.” In the Bratslavian lexicon, “inquiry” and “questioning” are reprehensible. As is well-known, Rabbi Nachman had declared a total war against academic scholars and philosophers–men who waste their days in inquiry and questions. Rabbi Nachman saw the realm of inquiry as the antipode of faith and wholeheartedness.148 His complaint was followed by a threat: “If you want to ask, I will deny myself entirely.” What Rabbi Nachman would deny is not clear. Would he deny that the story occurred? Would he deny that he had told it? Or was he emphasizing the word “myself”–meaning to say that he would deny any connection between 148 See, for example, Likutei Moharan II 44; Sipurei Ma’asiyot (“Ma’aseh MeiChacham VeTam”). See also Green, Tormented Master, pp. 297–298.

78 

 “The Story of the Bread”

himself and the story? Apparently Rabbi Nachman was blurring the identity of the protagonist to which the Hasidim were alluding; yet in truth this angry response confirmed their conjecture that the protagonist was in some way Rabbi Nachman himself, and that if they would not implore excessively, Rabbi Nachman would not deny this. Afterwards, Rabbi Nachman added, “There is one that is two, and there are two that are one. When he is here, he is there as well, etc.” It appears that after Rabbi Nachman’s initial reaction abated somewhat, he chose to relate in some way to the body of the question. Although this part of his answer was purposely obscure, it should not be viewed solely as an additional evasion but as a response to the question. The question had referred to the locus of the protagonist: “if that man is nearby or far away.” In the first part of his response–“there is one that is two, and there are two that are one”–he denied the possibility of determining the protagonist’s identity, declaring that there is no definite unit called a “man,” and if there is a being who is two, he can also be three and so forth. The figure whose identification they seek does not exist as a circumscribed and precise entity. In the second part of this statement–“when he is here, he is there as well, etc.”–he nullified the distinction between “here” and “there,” in this way categorically nullifying locale as a possible way of defining identity. There is no definite location to that man. He is not connected to or found in a particular place–when he is “here,” he is also “there.” Rabbi Nachman’s response apparently provides no answer to the Hasidim’s question. But it does articulate an attempt to set the story in the realm to which it belongs: a realm in which circumscribed and precise identity is not possible, a realm in which diffusion between man and man and between place and place can occur. Rabbi Nachman prefers to deny himself in order to nullify a simple identification between himself and “the person tender in years”–yet he ultimately does not deny that identification. Rabbi Nachman’s response to the questions makes it clear that the mystical occurrence described in the story did not take place in a regular world in which ordinary distinctions between place and place, man and man, generation and generation, existent and emergent, are valid. Rabbi Nachman seems to have responded with disappointment or even a certain amount of anger to his Hasidim’s lack of understanding, which expressed itself in questions whose purpose was to identify more precisely the person and occurrence in terms of place and bearings. The question regarding the locale of the man–whether he is near or far– was no different than asking whether the river of fire is here or there, or whether crumbs from the bread still remain. In his answer, Rabbi Nachman made it clear that he was not relating a narrative in ordinary terms of place, time and person, and that questions and inquiries that focus on these details will lead to a denial of



Concealment and its function 

 79

the episode altogether. Only freeing oneself from this conceptual framework can lead to a more proper understanding of the narrative and the nature and limits of the powerful mystical experience. Thus, even as Rabbi Nachman allowed the autobiographical aspect to remain alive and well–and so for the time being, despite his threat, he did not deny it–at the same time he did not permit the story and its characters to be defined within certain boundaries and circumscribed concepts of place, time and person.

10 Concealment and its function149 And he commanded [them] to review this story. And he said that “this story will be needed for he who is here with us today and for he who is not here.150 Be aware of what will come of this story after time has passed.” And he cautioned [them] not to tell it to an outsider. “If you tell, I will still love you, but that love will be like Chaikl being joyful”–(meaning that [Chaikl’s] joy is actually not joy at all). He also said that all who hear [the story] are bound by a common commitment not to reveal it to an outsider.

Rabbi Nachman’s directives on how his Hasidim should conduct themselves in regard to this story are composed of two elements, which express an internal tension. The first element consists of the directive to review and tell the story, the assertion that its role and importance reach beyond the community of listeners and even beyond the present generation, and the proclamation that the future of the story still lies before it, so that only “after time passed” will it be possible to see what will come of it. This implies a desire that the story be exposed to a wide community of listeners, and that it be told and retold for generations. The second element indicates an antithetical goal. Rabbi Nachman’s warning not to tell the story to an outsider, his threat of the loss of his love, and the placing of mutual responsibility on the group members not to reveal the story–these all express a desire for concealment and silence. This tension between the aspiration, on the one hand, to retell the story and transmit it to coming generations and the concern, on the other hand, to conceal it constitutes a broader, fundamental tension in the attitude of those who possess esoteric knowledge.151 This dialectic characterizes all of Hasidism from its incep149 Moshe Halbertal’s Concealment and Revelation provides a fruitful perspective on the topic of esoteric knowledge. 150 Deuteronomy 29:14. 151 See Halbertal, Concealment and Revelation, in particular pp. 1–7, 88–92.

80 

 “The Story of the Bread”

tion152–and in particular the world of Bratslav, which is in a constant state of tension between revelation and concealment.153 In addition to this dialectic’s relevance to the exterior level of “The Story of the Bread” and to the question of who is permitted and who forbidden to reveal it, it is one of the central factors in shaping the meaning and ramifications of the story, as will be explained further on. In order to communicate the importance of the story and to delineate how his Hasidim should relate to it, Rabbi Nachman made use of a paraphrase from Deuteronomy: “And not with you alone do I make this covenant and this curse, but with he who is here with us standing today before the Lord our God and with he who is not here with us today” (Deuteronomy 29:13–14). Rabbi Nachman, like Moses in his time, makes a covenant between himself and his Hasidim, and also facilitates a covenant between them and God. At the center of the covenant stands (now as then) the sublime incident of the giving of the Torah (this time, given anew). Rabbi Nachman thus explains to his Hasidim that the incident is not only a personal mystical experience, exalted though it may be, which only affects the participant, but an occurrence with major significance for them and for generations to come. It is an occurrence whose meaning is difficult to describe at present, but “be aware of what will come of this story after time has passed.” Rabbi Nachman makes this covenant not only with his present listeners but with the coming generations as well. Therefore, he requires that his Hasidim retell the story and share it with the coming generations.154 Here two crucial points regarding the status of the renewed giving of the Torah should be emphasized. Without them, it is conceivable that Rabbi Nachman and Bratslav Hasidism would have traveled to entirely different realms of religiosity than those where they are today. The first is that the covenant does not include novel content. It possesses nothing that is not found in the Torah of Moses and in the oral Torah as it was shaped over the course of generations. The revelation and the covenant after it described in the story confirm the religion of Moses and Israel. The Torah that the “person tender in years” receives and the Ten Commandments that he pronounces are identical word-for-word to the Torah of Moses and to the Ten Commandments carved on the tablets of the first covenant. The vision that he sees at the time that

152 Regarding the secrets that were revealed to the Baal Shem Tov, see Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 21–22. 153 Regarding this tension as a characteristic of Bratslav literature in general, see Piekarz’s accurate description in Chasidut Breslav, pp. 9–16. 154 Rabbi Nachman emphasized his resolve in this connection to his teachings a number of times. See Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Nesiato VIshivato B’Umin,” 225 [41]), p.  193; Sichot Haran, 209, pp. 251–252.



Concealment and its function 

 81

he receives the Torah does not reveal a new Torah or even a new interpretation, but a renewed vision of “every generation and its interpreters, every generation and its leaders, and everything that a seasoned student will innovate.” Not only is there no hint of the nullification of the commandments or the revelation of new commandments, but the emphasis is on the renewed revelation of the Torah of Moses in all of its details and particulars. The second point is that the covenant is secret–this covenant contains the obligation to retell but, no less than that, the obligation not to tell. Something of the role of this secrecy may be learned from the sanction with which Rabbi Nachman threatened those who would violate the covenant and reveal the story. The secrecy, Rabbi Nachman informed his Hasidim, is the condition that maintains the love between him and them. Rabbi Nachman did not threaten punishment or disapproval, nor even complete nullification of that love. If they would reveal the secret, the love would no longer be genuine but comparable to an empty, meaningless joy. The secrecy is therefore an expression of the intimate nature of the connection between Rabbi Nachman and his Hasidim. Thus, revealing the secret to an outsider would violate the intimacy and damage the bond between them. Rabbi Nachman presents the mandate for concealment as a communal matter, a matter of mutual responsibility: the Hasidim “are responsible to each other.” This shared secret creates the group and separates it from every “outsider,” from anyone who is not a Bratslaver Hasid and a partner to the secret. The group qua group is responsible to maintain the story by telling it repeatedly, and keep it secret by concealing it from any outsider. The secret creates the need for mutual responsibility, which by its nature tightens the bond among the group members. The secrecy is therefore not only an external framework helping to guard the content of the knowledge but an inherent factor independent of that content. The secrecy enhances the love and intimacy between Rabbi Nachman and his Hasidim, and among the Hasidim themselves.155 But there is an additional, critical function of this secrecy, whose importance cannot be exaggerated: it acts as a restraining factor, confining the import of the new revelation to the circle of Hasidim. In this, the secrecy connects to the first point that was discussed in relation to the revelation–that it contains no novel content. Paradoxically, keeping the revelation a secret assures that the group will remain within the religion of Moses and Israel. It prevents the group’s transformation into a new creed. This is not only in regard to the challenge that the group 155 Bratslav Hasidim took pride in the close bonds among themselves. See Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Ma’alat HaMitkarvim Eilav,” 292 [2]), p.  225; ibid. (“Avodat Hashem,” 471 [28]), pp. 310–311; Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), p. 174.

82 

 “The Story of the Bread”

would face of coping with dispute that would be aroused if the existence of the giving of a new Torah would be publicized. Rather, the very fact that an envelope of secrecy was placed around the revelation stabilized its nature and character, and influenced the relationship between this new giving of the Torah and the original giving of the Torah to Moses at Sinai. Apparently, as explained earlier, the concealment created a separate society of people who are privy to the secret, dividing them from the congregation of Israel who are not in that society and are thus defined as outsiders. And yet, publicizing the story would also likely lead to the separation of Bratslav Hasidim from the congregation of the children of Israel. This new giving of a Torah might be transformed into an attempt to set up an alternative Torah that would nullify the relevance and need for the original giving of the Torah. This danger was nullified (or at least reduced) when the new giving of the Torah was defined as relating only to the esoteric realm. In Jewish tradition, the revealed and hidden Torahs exist side by side. Even though substantial tensions often exist between the revealed and hidden strata, the presentation of the latter as an esoteric level that is not presently intended for the public at large allows it to exist peacefully alongside the revealed layer, which is designated for the entire public as well as for kabbalistic masters as well. This is the case whether the content of the secret, hidden doctrine is allegorical, philosophical commentary on the Torah or an expression of mystical thought. This co-existence is particularly germane when speaking of the Hasidic community, whose members are educated to accept the existence of the strata of both revealed and hidden Torah, and whose central religious figures are masters of the esoteric such as Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, the Ari and the Baal Shem Tov. Such a community can naturally accept the existence of the esoteric stratum, pregnant with meaning, upon whose existence the rectification of the world and all worlds depends, but which must remain a secret and the knowledge of which must be a secret knowledge, not to be shared with outsiders–and which does not nullify the revealed but exists alongside it. Rabbi Nachman saw and presented himself as a continuation of these figures: [Rabbi Nachman] said: After Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, who was an innovation, as is known, the world was quiet until the Ari (may his memory be for a blessing). Thus, from Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai until the Ari (may his memory be for a blessing), novel things as had been revealed by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai were not revealed until the Ari (may his memory be for a blessing), who was a new innovation, as is known, came. And he revealed such entirely new things that there had not been anyone to reveal such new things until the Ari. And from the Ari (may his memory be for a blessing) until the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing), the world was also quiet, without innovation, until the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing), who was a wondrous innovation, and revealed new things, came. And from the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing)



Concealment and its function 

 83

until now the world was also quiet without such an innovation, and the world continued only in accordance with the revelation that the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) revealed until now, until I came. And now I begin to reveal completely wondrous novel things, etc.156

Rabbi Nachman was aware that these figures were characterized not by their continuing the kabbalistic tradition but by the great innovations in their teachings, and he was apparently also well aware that they received their novel Torah insights in vision and prophecy, in conformity with kabbalistic and Hasidic tradition. But there was another, significant quality that they possessed: their new teaching–despite its high level, innovative nature and prophetic audacity157–was an esoteric Torah that existed alongside the exoteric Torah and did not come to replace it. It may be understood that the transformation of the story into a secret guarded by a small group transmits and preserves the nature of a personal and private revelation (which includes a new giving of the Torah)–in striking contrast to the giving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai, whose public nature was one of its outstanding characteristics.158 It may thus be said that the identity of Rabbi Nachman’s new Torah with the original Torah and the transformation of that revelation into a secret kept the Bratslav Hasidim as part of the religion of Moses and Israel, and so did they define themselves. There is no doubt that if the narrative about the revelation that the “person tender in years” underwent and the description of the new giving of the Torah had not been kept a secret, or that if that new Torah had proffered a new content, a religious and social explosion would have resulted. It is reasonable to suppose that Rabbi Nachman’s especial vigilance to transform “The Story of the Bread,” with the revelation that it describes, into a secret was not only a means of contending with opposition and dispute, but arose from his desire that he and his Hasidim continue to be a part of the congregation of Israel.

156 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Gedulat Nora’ot Hasagato,” 279 [39]), pp. 218–219. 157 Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and the Ari are described as companions in the supernal worlds, and their innovative teachings are said to have come from these worlds. The Baal Shem Tov too heard heavenly proclamations, and in a vision that he wrote about in a letter to his brother-inlaw he received knowledge that had the power to bring the messiah–but he was forbidden to publicize it. For more about the figure of the Baal Shem Tov as a prophet and about prophecy in Hasidism, see Idel, “HaBesht.” 158 Although, as is known, personal revelation did not prevent charismatic figures to found religions upon the authority of their personal story.

84 

 “The Story of the Bread”

The secret and essence, the secret and love It is possible that an additional aspect of the secrecy that shrouds “The Story of the Bread” is divulged in Rabbi Nachman’s stinging response to the question that his Hasidim put to him. Rabbi Nachman’s words, “You want to inquire and to ask. If you want to ask, I will deny myself entirely,” have a ring of insult and threat. Their questions, Rabbi Nachman is telling his Hasidim, will lead him, against his will, to “deny myself entirely.” Moreover, this implies that the denial would relate not only to the existence and occurrence of a particular event but to Rabbi Nachman’s “myself”–and not only in a partial and localized manner but “entirely.”159 Rabbi Nachman chose to communicate to his Hasidim the powerful mystical experience that he had undergone. However, he chose not to testify in the first person but in the third, as though describing an event that had occurred to someone else: “There is a person tender in years.” The mystical occurrence was wrapped in a literary cloak, and Rabbi Nachman vigilantly avoided answering the question regarding the apparent identity between himself and the “person tender in years.” It was clear to those who heard the tale that the “person tender in years” existed someplace outside its literary structure–whether “here” or “there.” This knowledge transformed the narrative into a story that conceals a secret within itself. In this sense, the secrecy related to “The Story of the Bread” is not just an envelope containing the story, determining who may gain access to it. Rather, it exists within the story–in its very existence as a story. Rabbi Nachman’s decision to tell his listeners “The Story of the Bread” therefore possesses a double valence: it is a decision to tell and reveal, and it is also a decision to dim that revelation and transform it into something that is only alluded to. The story turns into a secret that requires divulgence and deciphering, although the degree to which it allows that is not clear. From the perspective of the story-teller, this literary cloak makes it possible for his persona to appear and reveal itself without being exposed to all–not even to all of those who hear the story. In this way, the story-teller guards the boundaries of his intimate privacy, his secret, which is his innermost identity, the self that is not susceptible to being exteriorized and exposed. Such exteriorization would threaten the essential being of the self. Here, over-exposure will not reveal more of the essence of the story-teller but will harm its character as an internalized self and constrict it. Such exposure and revelation can destroy the boundaries of the existence of the self that is founded upon boundaries and distinction between itself and its environ-

159 Regarding the concept of the secret as providing protection against injury to the tissues that establish the self and its boundaries, see Halbertal, Concealment and Revelation, p. 175.



Concealment and its function 

 85

ment; and that destruction can lead to the denial of the very essence of its existence. “You want to inquire and to ask. If you want to ask, I will deny myself entirely.” Recalling the purpose of the secret hidden in “The Story of the Bread” and of Bratslavian concealment in general will make it easier to understand how exposing the secret threatens the existence of the story-teller’s self. Bratslavian concealment and self-censorship do not hide esoteric knowledge that has been passed down as a tradition from generation to generation. Rather, it hides previously unknown new secrets. Bratslavian concealment does not hide Godly mysteries. It does not deal with the Work of Creation or the Work of the Chariot. Rather, the concealment touches upon the person of Rabbi Nachman, his great level, the mystical experiences he underwent and his spiritual activity. In this sense, the secret is very personal, for it relates to the character of Rabbi Nachman. Thus, in “The Story of the Bread” the secret focuses not on the new Torah that was revealed but upon the identity of the “person tender in years” who stands at the center of the story, raising the question of whether it is possible to identify him as Rabbi Nachman, and what such an identification would mean. The secret is Rabbi Nachman himself. And indeed other texts show that Rabbi Nachman saw concealment as part of his identity. Thus, he said, “I am a secret that, even when it is revealed, remains a secret.”160 “I am a secret” is a pointed, even extreme declaration. Rabbi Nachman immediately ameliorates it by saying that even if his secret were revealed, that would not change his secret nature, for even when it is revealed, it remains concealed. However, this paradoxical statement exposes the existential and essential danger of existing as a secret–for the revelation of the secret nullifies one’s existence. The exposing of Rabbi Nachman’s secret is liable to result in him denying himself, in him nullifying his special existence–which is that he is a secret. Rabbi Nachman’s implicit threat that exposing the secret of the story is liable to bring about his self-denial assumes that his questioners desire his well-being, and that their question does not come from a detached voyeurism that is prepared to expose him and destroy his intimate privacy, thus injuring him. Rather, they have put their question to him in order to broaden their knowledge, and with it their connection and closeness to him. In this sense, Rabbi Nachman’s complaint insults the Hasidim who propounded this question. They sought knowledge based upon closeness and love. But Rabbi Nachman, feeling threatened by their closeness, feels compelled 160 Taken from Ohr Ha’Orot, issue 14, p. 2. The statement is cited with minor changes in other sources. See Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 2, 54, p. 15. And see also ibid., Volume 4, 389, p. 114; Volume 6, 405, p. 178.

86 

 “The Story of the Bread”

to erect a firm and brusque barrier that stands between them and the secret, between them and him. Possibly his further remarks convey a certain softening in his distress and alienation, which had resulted from this initial, dismaying state. And he cautioned [them] not to tell it to an outsider. “If you tell, I will still love you, but that love will be like Chaikl161 being joyful” (meaning that [Chaikl’s] joy is actually not joy at all). He also said that all who hear [the story] are bound by a common commitment not to reveal it to an outsider

Rabbi Nachman’s criterion of what sort of person is allowed to know this secret story has nothing to do with that person’s intellectual level or the spiritual serenity that he has gained.162 Rabbi Nachman has no interest in determining whether such a person is “a wise man and understanding from his own knowledge,”163 if he has “filled his belly with the bread and meat of halachic learning”164 or if he has passed the age of 40.165 The sole benchmark is whether the candidate is a member of the inner circle or an “outsider.” That which is good and felicitous to reveal to a close insider is not becoming–it is even shameful–to reveal to an outsider. And when Rabbi Nachman goes on to threaten his Hasidim that if they reveal the story to an outsider the love between him and them will be lost, that too indicates the connection between concealment and closeness, between concealment and love. Apparently Rabbi Nachman here adds threat upon threat, secret upon secret. Initially, he had threatened that if the Hasidim continue to question him and attempt to discover the secret of the identity of the “person tender in years” he will deny himself entirely. And now he threatens that if they reveal this secret story to an outsider he will not truly love them. But in this, Rabbi Nachman creates an inverse process. His first response to the Hasidim’s question excluded them from the circle of those who share the 161 In accordance with the manuscript of Rabbi Pinchas and other manuscripts. Rabbi Chaikl was one of Rabbi Nachman’s first Hasidim and one of the most outstanding. For a period of time, he served as cantor and as Rabbi Nachman’s aide. For more about him, see Gidulei HaNachal, p. 30. 162 Regarding the question of who is worthy of entering into the community of those who learn esoteric material and the preparations that such a person must engage in before entering such a community, see Hallamish, An Introduction to the Kabbalah, pp. 31–68. 163 m. Chagigah 2:1. 164 “And I say that only a person who has filled his belly with bread and meat may stroll in the orchard [of the secrets of the Torah]. And this ‘bread and meat’ indicates the knowledge of the explanation of what is forbidden and permitted and the like regarding other commandments” (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah [“Hilkhot Yesodei HaTorah,” 4:21]). 165 See Idel, “Letoldot ha’issur.”



Concealment and its function 

 87

secret. That reaction to the possibility of being exposed before his Hasidim–his feeling threatened and withdrawing–certainly created distance and alienation. But when he cautioned his Hasidim not to reveal the story to an outsider, Rabbi Nachman included his Hasidim within the circle of those who know the secret and he delineated the boundaries of that circle. Now the Hasidim are together with Rabbi Nachman in a circle of mutual closeness and love–one that had made it possible for them to hear the secret story. Anyone not part of this circle of love and camaraderie may not know the secret. Thus this second concealment, in contrast to the one preceding it, strengthens the closeness and partnership between Rabbi Nachman and his Hasidim, and emphasizes the sense that Rabbi Nachman’s decision to reveal and tell them the story was an expression of love and closeness. As before, keeping a secret is a communal matter, an expression of affection and mutual responsibility, a group intimacy that is not to be shared with any outsider. Here too an invasion of the intimate circle is liable to lead to the denial and nullification of the love between Rabbi Nachman and his Hasidim. Perhaps in a formal sense Rabbi Nachman will continue to love his Hasidim, he will continue to be their rebbe and they will continue to be his Hasidim. But “in truth” the breaching of this love so that it becomes available to all, with no boundaries that differentiate outside from inside, outsider from insider, destroys its ability to possess a distinct inner essence. It becomes like the joy of Rabbi Chaikl, which is solely external and not truly inner joy. This is the danger inherent in unveiling the secret, for that unveiling nullifies the intimacy and thus destroys the true and inner love dependent upon that intimacy. Rabbi Nachman’s concluding sentence, “All who hear [the story] are bound by a common commitment not to reveal it to an outsider,” contains a hidden, implicit warning that a person in the circle of mutual responsibility must take responsibility for others in the group and pay the price for any breach. And this threat accentuates another facet in the shared nature of love and concealment. The threat strengthens the group of listeners as a group bound together in a circle of closeness and mutual responsibility, a closeness amongst themselves and a closeness between them and their rebbe. This love between the Hasidim and their rebbe was important to Rabbi Nachman. He saw in it a precious “true love”: The love that exists between the tzaddik and his followers–that love cannot be imagined, and it is true love, essential love in ultimate truth.

88 

 “The Story of the Bread”

[This is] because the tzaddik loves his followers with a very great and broad love, and deeply desires their good, in truth…. And also the intense love of the tzaddik’s followers for the tzaddik is also very deep, for they also love him a great deal with a true love.166

According to Bratslavian tradition, this mutual love made the Bratslav Hasidim unique, so much so that even Rabbi Levi Yitzhak of Berditchev, who knew a number of the students of Rabbi Nachman, testified “that he had never seen Hasidim who love their rabbi as they do.”167 Rabbi Nachman himself boasted of this unique love between himself and his Hasidim: “[Rabbi Nachman] stated, ‘The world should be astonished at the love amongst us.’”168 Therefore there is no doubt that when Rabbi Nachman threatened the nullification of that love he did so out of his desire to preserve it. In his eyes, keeping the secret of the story and not revealing it to outsiders constituted the preservation of that love. Rabbi Nachman apparently attributed great importance to the mutual sharing of secret knowledge in building camaraderie among the Bratslavers, based on the view that without a shared secret withheld from outsiders there is no intimacy, and the love is liable to be denied entirely until none whatsoever remains.169

11 Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual level following the revelation At the center of the secret narrative, “The Story of the Bread” (also known as “The Story of Receiving the Torah”), stands the description of Rabbi Nachman receiving and proclaiming the Torah as had Moses on Mt. Sinai. Rabbi Nachman exper­ ienced not only an instance of Divine inspiration (a level just short of prophecy) or the imparting of an isolated secret but a total revelation of the entire Torah, with all of its branches stretching across all generations from beginning to end, including all of the Torah insights that every seasoned student ever innovated and ever will innovate. The experience that Rabbi Nachman underwent reprised the revelation that Moses attained at Mt. Sinai. Rabbi Nachman received and recited the Ten Commandments and the Torah from God as Moses had received it. Rabbi Nachman no longer required the event that had occurred at Mt. Sinai and

166 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Avodat Hashem,” 471 [28]), pp. 399–400. 167 Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), p. 175. For a good example of Bratslavian camaraderie, see Yemei Shmuel, Part 2, Chapter 148, pp. 95– 99. 168 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Ma’alat HaMitkarvim Eilav,” 292 [2]), p. 289; ibid. (“Avodat Hashem,” 471 [28]), pp. 310–311; Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), p. 174. 169 On this topic, see as well Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 230–238.



Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual level following the revelation 

 89

was no longer dependent upon the intermediary of Moses for anything. There was not and could not be an authority higher than he; neither a human authority nor the authority that comes from a prior text. He constituted a novel, complete beginning of the Torah. Everything was revealed to him and everything emerged from his mouth. In this sense, revelation has the power to establish a new religion. But a few factors prevented a development of a new religion, the transformation of Bratslav Hasidism into a sect separate from the Torah of Moses and the tradition of Israel: the occurrence of the mystical event as a personal and not a public phenomenon, and the insistence on keeping “The Story of Receiving of Torah” a secret and, in parallel, the full correspondence between the Torah that Rabbi Nachman received and proclaimed and the Torah that was given on Sinai with all of its details and particulars. Still, the intense mystical experience described in the story provides sufficient background and explanation of the development of Rabbi Nachman’s view of himself as the tzaddik of the generation and the tzaddik for generations, and as someone who can pave a pathway to the messiah. Rabbi Nachman’s view of himself as being on the level of Moses who receives the Torah may serve as a source of his self-image as “Moses-Messiah” who redeems Israel. Not only did Moses receive and transmit the Torah, but he was also the “first redeemer,” who brought Israel forth from subjugation to freedom. Rabbi Nachman’s self-awareness as a tzaddik on the level of Moses transmitting the Torah, anchored in the powerful mystical experience described in “The Story of the Bread,” comprises a natural basis for the development of his understanding of himself as someone destined to fulfill an important role in the redemptive process. And like Moses, who knew that he would not see the nation of Israel come to its home in the Holy Land but who brought them to the gates of the Promised Land, so too Rabbi Nachman knew at a certain stage that he would not see the redemption in his lifetime but he still viewed himself as someone paving the pathway to the righteous redeemer, so that the fire that he had lit in his lifetime would not be extinguished until the coming of the messiah.

Chapter Three The Stream of Mystical Consciousness: The Character of Mystical Experience and the Way that it is Shaped as Literature in “The Guest Who Came In” This chapter will focus on Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav’s story, “The Guest Who Came In,” which appears in Chayei Moharan. Like “The Story of the Bread,” it describes an arresting mystical experience. Considered as literature, these two narratives are akin in style. However, they present two incommensurable descriptions of the mystical experience. I will present a detailed analysis of “The Guest Who Came In,” and afterwards address the questions that arise from a comparison between it and “The Story of the Bread.” In addition to the 13 tales gathered in Sipurei Ma’asiyot, Rabbi Nachman told many stories.1 An important compilation of these was published in Chayei Moharan, in a section entitled “Sipurim Chadashim” (‘New Stories’).2 These stories possess a character unique in Rabbi Nachman’s creative output, revealing elements that do not come to light in any of his other writings, whether expository or literary.3 Simply from a literary perspective, the stories in this collection are extraordinary and fascinating. They have not as yet received sufficient attention– neither in themselves4 nor in their role as a significant source of inspiration for various authors of the new Hebrew literature.5 Although this chapter is dedicated This chapter is based on “The stream of mystical consciousness: The character of mystical experience and in the literary ways that it is shaped as literature in ‘The Guest Who Came In,” by Rabbi Nachman of Bratzlav.” In Ma’aseh Sipur: Mechkarim B’Siporet HaYehudit, editors Avidav Lipsker and Rella Kushlefsky,) pp. 267–294. Ramat Gan University, Ramat Gan 2009. [Hebrew] 1 See Elstein, Pa’amei Bat Melekh, p. 7. 2 Chayei Moharan, written by Rabbi Natan of Nemirov, was published by Rabbi Nachman of Tche­­rin (Lemberg 5634 [1874]). The book contains a vast amount of material about Rabbi Nachman’s life, as well as conversations and short statements that were not included in Likutei Moharan. A sizable part of the book is dedicated to providing the background and context of the expository and literary material that was published in Likutei Moharan and in Sipurei Ma’asiyot. 3 See for example Joseph Weiss’s analyses of two dream narratives in this collection (Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 42–57). And see also Green, Tormented Master, pp. 164–174. 4 See Dan, HaSipur HaChasidi, pp. 179–183; Morris, “Hapeh hayoled briot,” pp. 29–42. 5 For instance, in his story, “Churban Beit HaTzaddik,” Y.L. Peretz quotes entire sentences from “The Guest Who Came In” and other stories in this collection (Perez, Ketavim, p. 105, Machazeh 1, and p. 106, Machazeh 3). It is also instructive that in Peretz’s unabashed attempt to imitate and rework Rabbi Nachman’s stories in “The birds and the parchments: From the stories of R. Nachmenke,” the name of the story and most of the reworked material derive their inspiration not from Sipurei Ma’asiyot but



The Stream of Mystical Consciousness 

 91

to “The Guest Who Came In,” it can also serve to help understand the unique character of other stories in this collection. “The Guest Who Came In” is a self-contained narrative, and I quote it here in full.6 The first day of Hanukkah, 5569, after lighting the Hanukkah candle at night.7 A guest entered the house. He asked the householder, “How do you support yourself?” The man answered, “I don’t have a regular income in my house. I am supported by the world.” [The guest] asked him, “What are you learning?” and the man answered him. They began speaking with each other, until they began to speak words that come from the heart. The householder began to long and yearn deeply to know how one arrives at a certain level of holiness. The guest told him, “I will learn with you.” The householder was amazed, and he began to think, “Perhaps this isn’t a human being at all.” But when he saw that [the guest] was talking with him like a human being, his faith in him was strengthened. He immediately began to call him Rabbi, and he told him, “First of all, I want to learn from you how to treat you with the proper respect, and certainly not to insult you, heaven forbid. But it is difficult for a creature of flesh and blood to be absolutely careful. Please teach me how to treat you with the proper respect.” [The guest] replied, “I don’t have time right now. Another time, I will come and I will teach this to you. But now I have to leave.” [The man] said to [the guest], “Tell me how far I should accompany you.” [The guest] said to him, “Until past the door.”

from “Sipurim Chadashim” (Peretz, Ketavim, pp. 78–83). In a forthcoming essay, I will discuss the influence of this collection of stories on Agnon’s Sefer HaMa’asim and Agnon’s awareness of this influence. 6 Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Sipurim Chadashim,” 85 [5]), pp.  81–83. This is also quoted in the manuscript of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias (Jerusalem, Schocken Institute 16988, pages 135b–136a), and in other manuscripts. 7 The notation of time is not a part of the story but signifies when Rabbi Nachman told it. This is similar to notations of time that introduce other stories in “Sipurim Chadashim,” such as, “that which he told at the beginning of the summer of 5564. He said…” (ibid., 83 [3] p. 75), and “Monday, 24 Iyar 5564, the eve of the holy Sabbath after kiddush. And I saw in a dream…” (ibid., 87 [7], p. 83). (Regarding this second instance, it is more reasonable to assume that Rabbi Nachman told the dream after kiddush than that he had the dream after kiddush.) And there are other such examples.

92 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

[The man] began to think, How can I go out with him? Right now, I’m with him among others (because there were other people in the house). But should I go out with him alone? Who knows who he really is? He said aloud, “I’m afraid to go out with you.” [The guest] replied to him, “Since I can learn with you, if I wanted to do anything to you even now, who could stop me?” [The man] accompanied him past the door. [The guest] immediately grasped [the man] and they began to fly. [The man] was cold, so [the guest] took a garment and gave it to him. He told him, “Take this garment. It will be good for you. You will have food and drink and everything good, and you will sit in your house.”8 And [the guest] flew with [the man]. When [the man] looked around, he saw that he was in his house. He himself didn’t believe that he was in his house. But he saw that he was speaking with people and eating and drinking as everyone does. In the middle of that, he saw that he was flying as before. Then he saw that he was in his house again. Then saw that he was flying. This continued for a long time. [The guest] brought [the man] down in a valley between two mountains. [The man] found a book there that was filled with combinations of letters: “azach [an acronym of the letters alef, zayin, chet] is [the letter] dalet,” and so on. There were illustrations of vessels, and inside the vessels were letters. Also, inside the vessels were the letters referring to those vessels–that is, using those letters, one could make those vessels. He had a tremendous desire to learn that book. In the middle of that, he looked and saw that he was back in his house. Again he looked and he was [back] there [in the valley]. He decided to go up the mountain. Perhaps he would find a community there. When he climbed the mountain, he saw a golden tree with golden branches. On the branches hung vessels like those that had been illustrated in the book. Inside these vessels were tools by means of which one could make the vessels. He wanted to take the vessels. But he couldn’t, because they were entangled in the crooked branches. Meanwhile, he saw that he was back in his house. He found this extraordinary. How was it that he was here one moment and there the next? He wanted to tell this to the people [in the house], but how could he tell them such an incredible thing? Meanwhile, [the man] looked out the window and saw the guest. He began to plead with [the guest] to come to him. [The guest] said to him, “I don’t have time, because I am going to you.”

8 In the manuscript of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias: “‘and return to your house’ (another reading: ‘and sit in your house’)” (Schocken 16988, p. 135b).



The Stream of Mystical Consciousness 

 93

He said to him, “This itself is incredible. I’m here, and what do you mean that you are going to me?” [The guest] answered him, “At the moment that you agreed to accompany me past the door, I took your neshamah [the highest level of your soul] and I gave it a garment from the lower Garden of Eden, leaving your [two lower soul levels,] nefesh and ruach. When you bring your thoughts to [your neshamah], you are there and you draw an illumination down to you from there.9 But when you return here, you are here.” I don’t know what world he is from, [but] he is certainly from a good world. And it is still not finished, and it has not concluded.

The story is suffused by a magical yet threatening atmosphere. The householder flies through the air and reaches wondrous regions, but his journey is tinged by menace and distress. A number of elements and developments in the story create an atmosphere of danger and strangeness. The story opens directly with action: “A guest entered the house.” There is no exposition preceding the action, providing context. Even as the story proceeds, no missing background elements are provided. From the beginning of the story to its end, the reader does not know where and when the events are taking place, who the householder is, the nature of his work, and whether or not he has a family. The reader enters an uncharted and unidentified region, and even before the characters have been introduced he is witness to a dramatic event whose meaning it is difficult for him to decipher. The arrival of the guest introduces a foreign factor into the householder’s life that he cannot identify–a factor that, as the story continues, is revealed to be domineering and belligerent. The guest possesses wondrous powers, which arouse the householder’s suspicion and fear. The guest then seizes the householder, threatening his freedom and perhaps even his life. Throughout the entire story, the reader lacks knowledge of the guest’s nature and origin, and this creates an aura of mystery around him. The chain of events and the cause that impels them are unclear. Why does the guest seize the householder? What is the world to which he takes him? How does the kidnapping end? The information given to clarify matters is insufficient, and itself constitutes a sort of riddle that calls for a solution. Thus, for instance, the guest’s account, “I don’t have time [to come to you], because I am going to you” explains nothing, but instead constitutes a paradoxical statement that itself requires elucidation.

9 In the first printed edition of Chayei Moharan (Lemberg 5634), the phrase is, “an illumination from me to you” (p. 13a).

94 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

The atmosphere of threatening mystery has a fantastical hue.10 The ability to fly in the air and the householder’s encounter with the golden tree have no parallel in everyday reality, but only in the world of imagination and dreams. Yet these fantastical components are situated in the realistic, everyday world. The householder is “speaking with people and eating and drinking as everyone does.” He politely greets the guest who enters his home and speaks with him regarding Torah learning and earning a living. This portrayal of the consensual level of reality–“as everyone does”–makes it difficult for the reader to perceive the events described in the story as relating to a reality completely divorced from that familiar to him. Instead, it creates the sense that these events are occurring in the framework of the known world, which has been invaded by a strange, disparate and threatening element. Another expression of this is the connection between the two worlds: a connection exemplified in the householder’s shifting back and forth from the regular world in which he is at home, speaking with people, eating and drinking, and the world that he reaches by flying through the air, a world that contains a golden tree upon which vessels made out of letters grow. The interweaving of the fantastical with the commonplace prevents the reader from feeling comfortable–a feeling that he would have enjoyed had he been assured that the threatening world described in the story is distant and does not impinge upon his own tranquil and assured world. Further on, I will address other implications of the link between the two worlds.11

1 Circles of dissociation12 The sense of dissociation in the story grows increasingly stronger, spreading outward in a number of circles in which a person would have expected to feel connedness and closeness.

10 Regarding various definitions of the fantastic and the differentiation between that and the bizarre and wondrous, see Todorov, The Fantastic; Bartana, HaFantasyah, pp. 24–38. Regarding the fantastical dimension in Rabbi Nachman’s stories, see Wiskind-Elper, Tradition and Fantasy. 11 Regarding these components as characterizing a “Kafkaesque situation” and atmosphere, see Barzel, Bein Agnon LeKafka, pp. 63–71. 12 I am using the concepts of “dissociation” and “alienation” in their original sense, without direct reference to the concept of “defamiliarization” associated with the formalist Russian school– in particular, the writings of Viktor Shklovskii (“Art as technique”)–which addresses artistic and literary techniques that come to de-automatize the reader’s assimilation of phenomena in order to refresh his perceptions.



Circles of dissociation 

 95

The individual’s relationship to the world Step by step, the stranger gains control over the householder. At first he dominates the householder by consolidating his position as a knowledgeable and authoritative being: “The guest told him, ‘I will learn with you.’ … His faith in him was strengthened. He immediately began to call him Rabbi, and he told him, ‘First of all, I want to learn from you how to treat you with the proper respect.’” Afterwards, the guest takes the householder out of his house even though the householder is hesitant, with the implicit threat that “if I wanted to do anything to you even now, who could stop me?” In the third stage, the guest seizes the householder and begins to fly with him. Although he gives the householder food and clothing, that itself demonstrates that the householder is unable to care for even his basic needs, and the guest–now kidnapper–has made him dependent upon his largesse. The guest’s domination over the householder continues for the remainder of the story. And since the story “is still not finished, and it has not concluded,” from the perspective of the reader the householder remains in the hands of the guest. The guest’s dominance plunges the householder into a dominion of strangeness. He describes the events that he undergoes as “incredible.” Moreover, the householder comes to lack confidence in the very fact that he is in his house: “He himself didn’t believe that he was in his house.” A person’s house should be his castle, a protective and safe space where everything is familiar and recognizable. But now his house is alien. At the beginning of the story, the house provided the householder with a sense of confidence, and so he did not want to leave in order to accompany the guest, and he said, “I’m afraid to go out with you.” But now he feels intimidated even in his house, where the guest threatens him that “if I wanted to do anything to you even now, who could stop me?” The householder’s alienation from his home is especially ominous insofar as all that the reader knows about him is that he is a “householder.” That is not only a technical designation of legal ownership but a description of a person who, standing on his own ground, acts with assurance and decisiveness. This sole designation of the primary figure in the story is shaken by the unfamiliarity that the guest brings with him.13 13 This description recalls the words of Job, “He will never again return to his house, and his place will never again recognize him” (Job 7:10), which are part of a description of the transience that characterizes man’s existence in this world. The loss of home as an expression of alienation has many cultural reverberations in philosophy and literature. Martin Buber describes periods in the life of the spirit when “a person is immersed in the world as in his house,” and other

96 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

The individual’s relationship to others The householder experiences turbulent and wondrous events, and “he wanted to tell this to the people.” But he is aware that he cannot do so, because “how could he tell them such an incredible thing?” Although the householder lives, eats and talks with other people, he knows that he cannot disclose the most meaningful events that he is undergoing. The more incredible the occurrences, the more the astonishment they would arouse–and that diminishes the possibility of ever fulfilling his desire to communicate them to others.

Subversion of the normative The authoritative presence of the unknown guest, who has quickly turned into a “Rabbi” and even awakens the conjecture that “perhaps this isn’t a human being at all,” causes the householder to lose confidence in his ability to know the proper way of behaving in his own home. In his distress, he turns to the guest himself and asks him for guidance regarding normative, basic behavior: “And he told him, ‘First of all, I want to learn from you how to treat you with the proper respect, and certainly not to insult you, heaven forbid. But it is difficult for a creature of flesh and blood to be absolutely careful. Please teach me how to treat you with the proper respect.’” In his familiar and recognizable world, the householder knew what is proper and appropriate. But now, when his entire environment has grown unfamiliar, he does not apprehend which behavior is suitable. Like a traveler visiting a foreign land whose rules and social graces he does not know, the householder fears that he is liable to err due to a lack of understanding both when he acts and when he refrains from acting, for he does not know the meaning of his deeds and cannot anticipate their outcome. This distress is notable when he turns to the guest for a second time with a request for guidance: “[The man] said to [the guest], ‘Tell me how far I should accompany you.’ [The guest] said to him, ‘Until past the door.’” At this point, the positions of the two figures are reversed: the householder becomes like a guest who has come to a place whose protocols he does not know,

periods characterized by a feeling of “lack of home.” He sees these as important phases in the development of the spirit (Buber, Penei Adam, pp. 14–15). Agnon made extensive use of the loss of home as an expression of alienation. And this is a prominent motif in Hebrew literature as a whole–see, for example, Kurzweil, Masot Al Sipurei Shai Agnon, pp. 144–148. For more about alienation as homeless existence, see Sagi, below, note 25.



Circles of dissociation 

 97

whereas the guest assumes the position of a man who knows and decides what is proper and correct in his home. In the next stage, the householder becomes a guest in the world of the stranger–an unwilling guest, for the stranger has seized him and flown with him to an unfamiliar realm. In the course of this kidnapping, the guest acts like a generous host, presenting the householder with “food and drink and everything good,” and even says, “and you will sit in your house”–which is to say, “Make yourself at home.” If this phrase is understood as referring to the householder’s literal house, it underscores the transformation that has taken place: the alien guest has become the host, and he decides when and how the householder will sit in his house, and when he will leave it to once again fly.

The individual’s relationship to himself Increasing unfamiliarity not only permeates the circles that surround the householder, but even penetrates into his relationship with himself. “He himself didn’t believe that he was in his house. But he saw that he was speaking with people and eating and drinking as everyone does.” The householder sees himself from the outside, as though he is looking at someone else. The householder’s alienation from himself grows especially evident when the split between his awareness and actions affects more than habitual, semi-automatic behavior and states of being. Even when the householder is conversing with others–an action that requires maximal concentration–his consciousness is so estranged from his actions that only as a result of consciously looking at himself does he realize that he is speaking with people. The process is clearly described: every time he looks at himself, he notices that he is in a location different than he had been before. The students of the Maggid of Mezeritch describe a similar state of being. A person is praying with deep concentration, immersed in his devotions, until he looks at himself and asks if he is praying with concentration. From that moment on, he is no longer in a state of prayer. Rather, he is involved in an activity that possesses an entirely different complexion: he is contemplating whether or not he is praying with concentration. As soon as he looks at himself, that interrupts his prayer and causes him to think about the prayer and himself. So too in this story: when the householder looks at himself, he is disengaged him from his spiritual state. That creates the frequent shifts between the two worlds. “In the

98 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

middle of that, he saw that he was flying as before. Then he saw that he was in his house again. Then saw that he was flying. This continued for a long time.”14 The force of this action may be recognized not only in the number of times that the verb “looked” and the resultant shift occur in the text,15 but also in the repeated use of the phrase, “then he saw,” which emphasizes the recurring nature of this action; and also in the use of the phrase “in the middle of that, he saw,” which emphasizes rapid, multiple shifts. And of course the narrator’s testimony that “this continued for a long time” also connotes the wide range of this action. The story therefore presents a fascinating literary description of the consciousness of a person who is in an ongoing state of contemplation that does not permit him to be consistently involved with his existence as an experiencing subject16 but creates an inner dissociation so that he perceives himself as an external, dissociated object.17 The beginning of the contemplative state of consciousness is described as an irreversible process that permits no exit. The process begins at the moment that the householder is prepared to endanger himself by leaving the doorway of his house. At that moment, he is isolated from the naïve state of consciousness associated with home. As soon as he leaves the house, he is pulled into a contemplative state of consciousness, in which he remains until the end of the story. That contemplation is not described as a one-time experience or as a process of awareness that occurs at set times but as an ongoing process 14 A person must pray with all his might until he is stripped of physicality and he forgets himself. Then everything is the life-force of the Lord, be he blessed; (and [then]) the entire being of [a person’s] thoughts is in [God] and he takes no notice whatsoever of how much he prays with concentration–for if he did, he would be noticing himself. Ohr Ha’Emet, 2b; quoted and discussed by Schatz-Oppenheimer, Hasidism as Mysticism, pp. 178–179. Schatz-Oppenheimer also discusses “the extinguishing of reflective consciousness” as a condition prior to entering prayer and the consciousness of clinging to God (ibid., p. 175–176). 15 From the point in the story when the householder leaves his house to the end, a section of about 230 words, the verb “looked” appears nine times. 16 Of course, ultimately an experience of contemplation is a type of subjective experience–but it is characterized by alienation from oneself that results from relating to the “I” as an object. 17 Descriptions of contemplation as an alienating process may be found in Romantic literature, such as in the typology of “the sentimental man who is also the contemplative man” (Schiller, On Naïve and Sentimental Poetry), in which the assertion is made that “the poet does not properly communicate his feelings to us, but rather his thoughts about it” (ibid., schillerinstitute.org/ transl/schiller_essays/naive_sentimental-1.html). As for existential thought and literature, from its inception existentialism stressed the realm in human existence susceptible to contemplation and alienation. Regarding these states in both existential and religious contexts, see Sagi, Kierkegaard, Religion, and Existence, pp. 17–24, 75–96. Further on, I will address the connection between alienation and yearnings for holiness.



Circles of dissociation 

 99

that creates repeated passage between two worlds and comprises the householder’s flow of consciousness, one of whose outstanding characteristics is a sense of dissociation.

The reader The feeling of unfamiliarity is not limited to the householder but is transmitted to the reader as well, and that in two principal ways. First, the reader identifies with the householder’s sense of his world having grown unfamiliar. And second, the reader is affected by the strange and unfamiliar nature of the narrative.

The reader’s identification with the householder In addition to the reader’s natural empathy for the fears and astonishments of the householder, his tendency to identify with the householder is reinforced by the narrator’s point of view. The narrator is not an actor in the story but an onlooker. However, although he relates the story in the third person, he is not an omniscient onlooker. Rather, his is the third person limited point of view. Throughout the story he presents only the perspective of the householder. In physical terms, he describes only what is in the householder’s range of vision, and in terms of awareness, he informs the reader solely about what the householder knows and feels. In contrast, the emotional world of the guest is closed and unfamiliar.18 The fact that the narrator presents the householder’s point of view intensifies the reader’s identification with his sense of unfamiliarity and fears, both because the reader feels close to the householder–since he is privy to the householder’s inner world–and because the reader does not know any more than does householder, and he too wonders about the identity of the guest, what he wants, and whether he will harm or help the householder.

Alienation in the relationship between the reader and the text An additional sense of unfamiliarity exists in the relationship between the reader and the text, since it is hard for the reader to identify the “literary agreement”

18 Further on, in the section dealing with the autobiographical aspect of the story, I will expand on this point as well as on the relationship between the narrator and the householder.

100 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

that informs the story and that is meant to shape the framework of the reader’s expectations. Due to its fantastical elements, the text cannot be classified as a realistic story describing events that have occurred in the framework of normal familiar reality. But reading the story as a folktale–whose framework typically contains wondrous occurrences–is also problematical, for the householder’s description of events as “extraordinary … an incredible thing” makes it difficult to see the story as occurring in a world in which the fantastical is an accepted component of reality. The Hasidic context of the story raises the expectation that this is a Hasidic parable whose meaning reflects the system of concepts and values of that milieu. This expectation is apparently realized toward the end of the story, when the guest explains the events by utilizing concepts such as the division of the inner world of the person into nefesh, ruach and neshamah, and using terms such as “garment,” “clinging” and “lower Garden of Eden”–of all which are rooted in the world of kabbalah and Hasidism. However, this is not presented as the key to the story nor even as an explanation that can address the overall story, for it is offered by the guest, who is himself one of the figures in the story. Also, this explanation is not set forth at the end of the chain of events, but at a stage when the story “is still not finished, and it has not concluded.” The explanation therefore does not function as a extra-narrative structure that comes to illuminate the story and all of the events that occurred in it. Rather, it is a part of the narrative. In addition, the guest’s words provide no explanation of all of the events that occurred in the story and not even of the central questions, such as who the guest is, what he wants of the householder, the meaning of the tree, and so forth. Therefore, the guest’s words should be seen as part of the tapestry of the narrative itself, which yet remains to be explained and interpreted. It is reasonable to assume that “The Guest Who Came In” is a dream or vision that Rabbi Nachman experienced and later related to his Hasidim or wrote down himself.19 Dreams and visions violate the strict laws of reality, for in them the impossible and the unrealistic constantly occur. Also, the story’s central image– the man flying through the air–is reported as occurring in many dreams.20 The fact that “The Guest Who Came In” appears in the collection of “Sipurim Chadashim” alongside other dreams and visions of Rabbi Nachman supports this 19 This seems to be Rabbi Eliezer Shlomo Schick’s interpretation in P’ulat HaTzaddik, where he speaks of the story as describing something that Rabbi Nachman “saw.” In his words: “Wednesday, 25 Kislev: Our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) told what he saw yesterday at night after lighting the Hanukkah candle” (P’ulat HaTzaddik [Jerusalem], 810, p. 476). 20 Jung, Dreams, p. 69.



The root of the unfamiliar: yearnings for holiness 

 101

approach. However, that inference is not unassailable. In addition to dreams, the collection of “Sipurim Chadashim” also contains tales and stories. And the dreams are generally introduced by phrases specifically describing them as such–e.g., “Afterwards, he told what he had seen in a dream…” 21 and “He dreamt that there was a gathering of Jews….”22 The story of “The Guest Who Came In” possesses no such introduction. In addition, the majority of dreams are presented in the first person and the narrator is a figure in the story,23 whereas “The Guest Who Came In” is told in the third person and the narrator is not a figure in the story. The reader is therefore left with great difficulty when trying to decide if the text is describing a dream, a vision, or an invented tale. The difficulty of categorizing this narrative within a known literary convention prevents the reader from situating himself comfortably in that milieu, and thus leaves him feeling unfamiliar and surprised as he reads the text. This state parallels that of the householder. The householder is thrown into an encounter with an unfamiliar world that does not function according to known rules, as a result of which he does not know “how to treat” the guest and he does not know what is “proper.” The reader too finds himself contending with a text whose character is unclear, from which he does not know what he is meant to expect and in accordance with what system of norms he is meant to understand or judge it. The reader’s lack of clarity regarding the nature of the text and the unfamiliarity and confusion that he feels as he reads it do not result from a lack of literary polish in the text–to the contrary, they reveal a full correspondence between the contents of the narrative and the atmosphere that its presentation creates. It is clear that this unfamiliarity plays a central role in the story, and it is manifest across all of its levels. Further on, I will attempt to explain the root of the unfamiliarity in the story and describe what world it points to.

2 The root of the unfamiliar: yearnings for holiness Words that come from the heart, and longing for holiness The householder’s experiences begin with his conversation with the guest, and proceed in an orderly and detailed manner. The conversation opens on simple 21 Chayei Moharan (“Sipurim Chadashim,” 2), p. 95. 22 Ibid., 6. Similarly, “Soon after this, he told that he had seen in a vision or in a dream…” (4). And similarly “5564, on the eve of the holy Sabbath following kiddush–and I saw in a dream…” (7), “In Elul, he told that he had had a dream…” (15). 23 To exclude very brief dreams of a few lines only.

102 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

and everyday topics, such as earning a living and learning Torah. “They began speaking with each other, until they began to speak words that come from the heart.” This conversation inspires the householder to begin “to long and yearn deeply to know how one arrives at a certain level of holiness.” These yearnings for holiness drive the householder to accept the guest as a “Rabbi” and authority, and to agree to follow him out of the house, as a result of which he visits wondrous worlds. It is not the content of this initial conversation that arouses the householder’s yearning for holiness but the way in which it is conducted. When words emerge from the heart, they arouse a rarefied yearning for holiness in the listener. The householder engages in a heartfelt dialogue with the guest, which is revealed to be a dialogue with a representative from the world of holiness,24 who is as such able to change the life of the householder from a life “as everyone does” to one of soaring in supernal worlds.

Holiness and the way of the world The householder’s yearning for holiness and his attempt to achieve it bring him into a wondrous but menacing state. After the householder asks how one arrives at a certain level of holiness, the guest tells him, “I will learn with you.” Surprisingly, the householder is not joyful at the prospect but grows worried and suspicious that the guest “isn’t a human being at all.” What arouses the householder’s fear? Isn’t this what he had been hoping and yearning for? It is clear that concomitant with his yearning for holiness the householder feels certain that it is not possible to attain holiness. The very possibility that a person could know and teach him how to attain holiness appears so unrealistic that he concludes that if the guest knows this and offers to teach it, he cannot be human. The continuation of the story verifies the householder’s fear: the guest is indeed not human. The householder’s request for holiness has been answered, if only partially, not in this world but in a world where he and the guest soar in the air and he is clothed in a garment from the Garden of Eden. The world to which the householder is taken is different from and opposed to the normal existence of the world of people, in which human beings eat, drink and converse “as everyone does.” The attainment of holiness entails leaving the world of human beings. 24 There is no doubt that Rabbi Nachman’s perspective on conversation and colloquy of colleagues in serving God may be seen as comprising a significant source of Martin Buber’s “dialogue” viewpoint. See Bergman, Dialogical Philosophy, pp. 237–238. And see Mark, Existentialism Chasidi, pp. 5, 70–71.



The root of the unfamiliar: yearnings for holiness 

 103

When the guest asks the householder to accompany him “past the door,” the householder is seized by terror. Leaving the house means leaving the world of people–and “how can I go out with him? Right now, I’m with him among others (because there were other people in the house). But should I go out with him alone? Who knows who he really is? He said aloud, ‘I’m afraid to go out with you.’” The guest does not relent, and states portentously, “Since I can learn with you, if I wanted to do anything to you even now, who could stop me?” Rather than abate the householder’s fears, the guest intensifies them: the individual who can teach the householder how to reach holiness is not a human being–and if he wants to do anything at all, who can stop him? The householder takes courage and leaves his house. And as soon as he does so, his fear is realized: the guest seizes him. At the end of the story, it is made clear that the householder’s readiness to leave his home, where people are present, and follow the stranger–due to his yearning for holiness–was the decisive step that allowed him to make contact with another world: “At the moment that you agreed to accompany me past the door, I took your neshamah [the highest level of your soul] and I gave it a garment from the lower Garden of Eden….” Leaving the house and agreeing to follow his yearning for holiness exact a high price: the loss of a straightforward connection with the world of people and the loss of feeling at home in the skein of relationships (as has been discussed in previous sections).

Between two worlds Passage from one world to another does not necessarily imply living in a state of unfamiliarity. The strange can become the known and the emergence from one house can conclude in the entry to another. What creates unfamiliarity in the experience of the householder is his connection to two worlds at one and the same time. The householder’s emergence from the house begins a journey of wanderings back and forth between the world of human beings and another world that is both wondrous and threatening. The householder is placed in an ongoing and unresolved tension between his connection to the world of people– to eating, drinking and friendly conversation–and his connection to a higher world, a connection that is the fruit of his yearning for holiness. This is not a one-time passage from one world to another but a constant back and forth movement that does not allow the householder to feel at home in either reality. Whatever world he is in, when he looks at himself, he realizes that he is essentially in the other world. And being connected to another world undermines his sense of connection and at-homeness in his present world.

104 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

The householder’s yearning for holiness is shown to be a dissociating factor in his life. It strips him of the ability to feel at home in this world, yet on the other hand it does not allow him to be at home in the upper world fully enough to eradicate his relationship with this world, the world of people.25

3 The guest’s explanation: bringing the mystical element to the forefront Towards the end of the story, the householder’s astonishment over his wanderings intensifies: “He found this extraordinary. How was it that he was here one moment and there the next?” When he sees the guest, he asks him for an explanation, and the latter makes an attempt to elucidate. At this stage, the mystical layer, which was until now a hidden subtext, moves to the forefront. The language and symbols of kabbalistic mysticism are now woven into the revealed, explicit level of the text. For the reader, the guest’s mystical-kabbalistic explanation creates the need for a renewed reading–not only of those elements in the story on which the guest explicitly comments but of the story as a whole, which now appears in a significantly mystical-kabbalistic light. The guest’s words, which are few but weighty, express a kabbalistic-Hasidic worldview regarding the human soul and the processes that accompany a person’s clinging to God. I will explain in brief the kabbalistic context of the concepts and processes that the guest’s words allude to, and afterwards I will return to the role that these play in the story. [The guest] answered him, “At the moment that you agreed to accompany me past the door, I took your neshamah [the highest level of your soul] and I gave it a garment from the lower Garden of Eden, leaving your [two lower soul levels,] nefesh and ruach. When you bring your thoughts to [your neshamah], you are there and you draw an illumination down to you from there.

25 Regarding the different roles that unfamiliarity and alienation play in various cultural contexts, and regarding the link between the alienation that a person feels in relation to his realistic state of being and his attempt to break through to another state of being, see Sagi’s survey in Albert Camus, pp. 5–34. Interestingly, in Sagi’s description, alienation is a stage that precedes yearning and breaking through to a different state of being, whereas for Rabbi Nachman yearning for holiness precedes and creates the feeling of alienation.



The guest’s explanation: bringing the mystical element to the forefront 

 105

“I took your neshamah … leaving your nefesh and ruach” The guest explains that the householder’s flight and his subsequent vision of the book, the letters, the tree and the vessels occurred to his neshamah, whereas his nefesh and ruach remained together with his body in the regular world. Here the reader’s understanding of the story is transformed, for it is now made clear that the plot of the householder leaving his house, being seized, flying through the air and climbing a mountain occurred not to his body in the realms of physical space and time but to his neshamah. The guest’s explanation, which distinguishes between the flying neshamah and the ruach and nefesh, dovetails neatly with the prevalent outlook in the zoharic literature that there are three parts to a person’s inner world: nefesh, ruach and neshamah. The neshamah is the highest component, involved with mystical activities and contemplation of the secrets of the Torah.26 “The neshamah is the bridge between man and God”–between man and the upper worlds.27 And in Rabbi Nachman’s words, “Everyone’s neshamah constantly sees and attains extremely supernal matters, but the body does not know about them.”28 The guest’s revelation that he seized the householder’s neshamah provides context to the householder’s flight, for a long and variegated tradition exists in which the movement of the soul is described as flight. The sages of Talmudic times employ the expression, “his soul flew.” In midrashim, this phrase always describes a person’s death.29 In the kabbalistic literature, from Sefer HaBahir and onward, the emergence of souls into this world is also described as a flight: I am He who planted this tree for the entire world to delight in, and I spread everything in it. And I called its name “everything,” for everything is dependent upon it and everything comes forth from it, and everything needs it. And they gaze upon it and wait for it, and souls fly from it with joy.30

26 Regarding this division of a person’s inner world in the Zohar and regarding its roots in philosophy and kabbalah, see Tishby, The Wisdom of the Zohar, particularly pp. 684–698; Hallamish, An Introduction to the Kabbalah, pp. 260–264. 27 See Tishby, The Wisdom of the Zohar, Part 2, p.  686. For more on the neshamah, see Idel, “Nishmat Eloha.” 28 Likutei Moharan I 22:5. 29 For instance, “Before he had a chance to speak, his soul flew” (j. Berakhot 67b); “He told them, “What do you see? ‘I am Joseph your brother’ (Genesis 45:4). Immediately their souls flew” (Bereishit Rabbah [Mirkin] 93:8); “When the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘I am the Lord your God’ (Exodus 20:1), immediately their souls flew. When they died, the angels began caressing and kissing them” (Midrash Rabbah Hamevuar [“Shir Hashirim”], Jerusalem 5754, 6:3). And there are many more such examples. 30 Sefer HaBahir, 22, p. 11.

106 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

“And on the seventh day He rested and took His ease” (Exodus 31:17). What is meant by “and took His ease”– vayinafash, [which may be read as ‘and He souled’]? … That teaches that the neshamot fly from there. As the verse states, “and took His ease”–[He brought about souls].31 And what is the tree that you mentioned? He told him: [This refers to] the powers of the Holy One, blessed be He, one upon the other. And they are similar to a tree. Just as a tree by means of water brings forth fruits, so the Holy One, blessed be He, by means of water increases the powers of the tree. And what is the water of the Holy One, blessed be He? That is wisdom, and that is the neshamot of the tzaddikim that fly from the wellspring to the great channel, and rise and cling to the tree.32 “A river flowed out of Eden” (Genesis 2:10)–from here the souls fly.33

These sources describe the movement of souls as “flying,” and this term is also common in many sources in the Zohar, some of which I will discuss further on. Rabbi Nachman adopts this phraseology in “The Guest Who Came In” and animates it with a literary description of the householder’s soul flying through the air. But more than that, the story presents an instructive description of the rupture between a person’s neshamah and his ruach, nefesh and body. The great disparity that the householder discovers between his life as he is flying in the upper worlds and his existence in this world, the world of people, is explained by the guest as an outcome of his complex structure as a human being. His Godly soul can fly in the air, but the rest of his components remain in this world as he engages in conversation, eats and drinks. In the story, the experience precedes the concept. The householder feels the split within himself as he races between worlds, and he is troubled and astounded. Only in the second stage does the guest explain this astonishing state of affairs with a kabbalistic interpretation.

“And I gave it a garment from the lower Garden of Eden” The motif of the garment of the soul from the lower Garden of Eden is found in the zoharic literature, and is connected to the flying of souls and their connection 31 Ibid., 57–58, pp. 26–27. 32 Ibid., 119, p. 53. 33 Shekel HaKodesh, p. 36. Isaiah Tishby writes: “The descriptions in Sefer HaBahir of the neshamot emerging from the world of the sefirot, as if they flew out of ‘the tree,’ or flowed down with ‘the river’–descriptions that we also find in the writings of Rabbi Moses de Leon–occur very frequently in many passages in the Zohar (see Zohar I, 13a–13b, 76b (Sitrei Torah), 205b; II, 246a, 259a, etc.)” (Tishby, The Wisdom of the Zohar, pp. 694–695 and p. 718, note 21).



The guest’s explanation: bringing the mystical element to the forefront 

 107

to the upper worlds.34 The neshamah in its physical garb cannot join the upper world, and so it must put on a more refined, spiritual garment. Only then can it fly to the upper worlds and see, in the light of the clear lens: Come and see. When souls rise to the site of the bond of life, there they take delight in the radiance of the clear lens that shines from the highest site of all. But if the neshamah is not clothed in the radiance of another garment, it cannot approach to see that light. And the secret of the matter is that just as the neshamah is given a garment in which it is clothed so that it may exist in this world, so too is it given a radiant, supernal garment in which it may exist in that world, and look into that clear lens, from that land of life.35 36

The illuminated garment that the neshamah wears is taken from the lower Garden of Eden, which is situated between this world and the upper worlds, where the upper Garden of Eden is located. This garment makes it possible for the neshamah to see the glory of its Master37: For there the neshamot of the tzaddikim are clothed in the lower Garden of Eden, as in this world. And on the Sabbath and [other special] occasions they divest themselves and rise to see the glory of their Master.38 Fortunate is the portion of the person who attains those garments in the lower Garden of Eden.39

The guest’s words of explanation are precise, expressing the zoharic viewpoint of the flight of neshamot as they rise to connect to and witness the glory of God, an event that can occur not only after death but also during a person’s lifetime, during periods of Divine kindness that allow for spiritual elevation, such as Sabbaths and holidays.40

34 Regarding the garment as a basic pattern in the Zohar, see Cohen-Alloro, Sod HaMalbush. Regarding the garment of the neshamot, see ibid., pp. 50–88. Regarding the garment in sources preceding the Zohar and regarding the link to the concept of the “rabbinic cloak,” see Scholem, “Levush haneshamot,” pp. 290–306. For more on the secret of the garment in Nachmanides and in the early kabbalah, see Wolfson, “Secret of the garment”; Lorberbaum, “Kabbalat haRamban,” pp. 312–317; Idel, “Nishmat Eloha,” p. 353. 35 Zohar, Part 1 (“Parshat Noach”), p. 65b. 36 The translation is based on Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh, Volume 1, pp. 362–363. 37 Regarding the garment as a means of mystical attainment, see Cohen-Alloro, Sod HaMalbush, pp. 66–74. 38 Zohar, Part 1, (“VeYeitzei”), p. 156b. 39 Ibid., p. 210a. 40 In Appendix 1, I discuss the cluster of components that appear both in Rabbi Nachman’s story and in the zoharic tale of the events in the life of Rabbi Perachia.

108 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

The guest’s explanation also invokes possible kabbalistic-Hasidic interpretations of other entities in the story not mentioned by him, such as the tree,41 the vessels and the letters.42 Further on, these will be discussed as well. Until this point, I explained the section of the guest’s response regarding the householder’s flight. The other part of the guest’s words contains a covert explanation of the householder’s journeys between worlds.

“When you bring your thoughts to [your neshamah], you are there … but when you return here, you are here” “For by means of clinging do neshamot fly”43 The guest’s words refer to the concept of “clinging in thought.” Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, the student of the Baal Shem Tov, writes, “And in the name of my teacher I heard at length–but we will write succinctly–that wherever a person’s thoughts are, there he is in his entirety–whether in spiritual matters, so that if he thinks about spiritual matters, his neshamah is there, etc.”44 Sefer Keter Shem Tov, which anthologizes teachings quoted in the name of the Baal Shem Tov, presents a few iterations of the statement that “a person clings to where his thoughts are”45; and a similar stance may be found in other Hasidic sources.46 41 It possibly alludes to the Tree of Souls or to the strange orchard trees in the zoharic story about Rabbi Perachia, which I discuss in Appendix 1. Regarding additional kabbalistic sources regarding the tree that illuminate Rabbi Nachman’s use of this image in his stories, see Goren, “Ha’eitz kesemel,” pp. 66–80. 42 Regarding the vessels and the shattering of the vessels, see Tishby, Torat HaRa VeHaKelippah, pp. 21–61. Regarding letters and letter combinations, see above, Chapter 1, note 21. 43 Peirush Sodot HaTorah, p. 29a. Regarding this source, see Idel, “Nishmat Eloha,” p. 349. 44 Ketonet Passim, p. 278. And similarly in his Toldot Ya’akov Yosef: “A person is in the place that he thinks” (“Chayei Sarah,” p. 23a]). And there are more such statements in other sources. This statement, in similar wording, may be found in pre-Hasidic sources. In Rabbi Yosef Caro’s Maggid Meisharim, the following passage appears: “Necessarily, in the place that you have thought always, there will you cling… for naturally speaking a person’s nefesh clings to the way in which he thinks and contemplates, there his nefesh clings” (Maggid Meisharim, pp. 139–140). Regarding the roots of this viewpoint in kabbalah, see Elior, “R. Yosef Caro vehaBesht,” pp. 689– 691; Margolin, Mikdash Adam, pp. 294–302, 395. 45 Keter Shem Tov, pp. 16, 58, 71. 46 Thus, for example, this saying is quoted a number of times in the writings of Rabbi Nachman’s uncle, Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov. See Degel Machaneh Efraim (“Parshat Bereishit,” s.v. vayomer), p. 4; ibid. (“Parshat VaYeira,” s.v. vehu), p.  21; ibid. (“Parshat Shemot,” s.v. vata’al), pp. 75–76. An interesting development of this saying is found ibid. (“Parshat Mas’ei,” s.v. v’od), pp. 201–203. And see also Tzidkat HaTzaddik, 144, p. 65.



The guest’s explanation: bringing the mystical element to the forefront 

 109

Rabbi Nachman too, in the course of a discussion on the possibility of being absorbed into God and uniting with Him by means of knowledge and clinging in thought, interweaves a variant of this phrase, writing that “a person is entirely where his intellect thinks47 Thus, the guest’s words are a paraphrase of a common saying of the Baal Shem Tov that appears frequently in the books of his Hasidim and that serves as an important element in “clinging in thought,” which is a central theme of Hasidic mysticism.48 This viewpoint, which sees the reality that a person is in as dependent upon his consciousness, is presented by the guest to explain the situation to which the householder had responded with astonishment. In this context it is important to note that the householder does not express astonishment at finding himself in a wondrous world in which he flies through the air, but at his frequent passageways from one world to the other: “How was it that he was here one moment and there the next?” The guest explains both how it comes about that the householder is “there” and also the process that causes his frequent passageway between “here” and “there”: as a person’s thought races, it takes the person with it. It is interesting to note that the Baal Shem Tov’s words describe not only the possibility of being in another world but also swift passage from world to world: “and afterwards, in one moment, as soon as he thinks of the upper world he is in the upper worlds–for a person is in every place that he thinks about.”49 The Baal Shem Tov emphasizes that the transition can occur “in one moment,” and he explains this by saying that “a person is in every place that he thinks about.” The swift passage from world to world, which arouses the householder’s astonishment, is one of the characteristics of clinging in thought that the Baal Shem Tov describes.50 From the words of the guest, who explains the events in the story as a function of “clinging in thought,” the reader learns that whether the householder inhabits the world of people or the supernal world depends upon the focus of his 47 Likutei Moharan I 21:11. Regarding the role of clinging with the help of one’s consciousness in Rabbi Nachman’s doctrine, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 36–74. 48 Regarding clinging in thought, see Idel, New Perspectives, pp. 46–49. For more on clinging in thought and the ascent of the neshamah, see ibid., R. Menachem Recanati, pp. 125–141. 49 Tzava’at HaRivash, 68, p. 11. There are variants of this statement, the clearest of which I have quoted here. 50 A person’s ability to leap to the world of “clinging in thought” characterizes the Hasidic world, which emphasized the accessibility of that clinging and the possibility of attaining it quickly and not only at the end of an extended process that only an exclusive few can reach. See Scholem, “Devekut or communion.”

110 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

thoughts. When he clings to the world of people, that is his reality, and when he lives with the consciousness of another world, that is the realm of his existence and the world in which he exists. Thus, subjective consciousness becomes objective reality. In other words, a person’s existence in a particular world does not possess an objective nature disconnected from his subjective consciousness. Rather, it derives from his thoughts and consciousness. If the person’s thought travels back and forth between worlds, then he will travel with it–one moment here and one moment there.51 Rabbi Nachman weaves into the guest’s words materials that come from various mystical genres. The flight of neshamot and the garment from the lower Garden of Eden are taken from the world of early kabbalah and the Zohar, whereas the model of clinging in thought dominates in the world of Hasidism.52 This blend is posed in such a way that the Hasidic paradigm acts to interpret the earlier kabbalistic structures. Thus, the flight of neshamot is explained in terms of clinging in thought. Clinging in thought catalyzes the mystical experience, which is described as illumination53 and experienced as flight54 through the upper worlds. The story adopts literary forms from the Jewish mystical tradition, such as the narrative strand of the Zohar literature. This strand is similar to mythological literature, whose protagonists also meet frequently with wondrous figures that 51 See Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov, the grandson of the Baal Shem Tov and uncle of Rabbi Nachman, index: “[This is] in accordance with that which is known from my master, my forebear, my grandfather (may his memory be for the life of the world-to-come): that a person is entirely in the place where his thought is.” This perspective posits interdependence between the locus of a person’s thought and the system of laws that affect him. The laws of nature act solely on a person whose consciousness and thought are bound and connected to the natural world; the laws of nature do not, however, affect a person who clings in his thought to the spiritual world. In accordance with this, Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov explains that the goal of the miracles that occurred during the Exodus was to create a change in the consciousness of the children of Israel: to bring them forth from natural consciousness that sees in nature inviolable law to a spiritual consciousness that “He is omnipotent and there is no other than He.” As soon as this revolution of consciousness occurred, the nation of Israel emerged from the rule of the laws of nature, and shook off Egypt’s sovereignty (Degel Machaneh Efraim [“Parshat Shemot,” s.v. veta’al], p. 75). According to this perspective, the locus of a person’s thought determines not only the reality in which his neshamah exists but also his physical and bodily reality. Regarding the history of this approach, which stresses that a person’s viewpoint of reality is not gazing at reality as it is but that his consciousness and thought shape the way in which he exper­ iences and grasps reality and its laws, see Margolin, “Hafnamat chayei hadat,” pp. 190–209. 52 See above, note 44. 53 “And you draw down illumination from Him to you.” 54 Regarding flight through the air as an expression of mystical-prophetic experience in the Zohar, see Hellner-Eshed, A River Flows from Eden, pp. 56–57 and note 69.



The guest’s explanation: bringing the mystical element to the forefront 

 111

reveal universal secrets to them, or whose protagonists set out upon heavenly journeys that no human being has ever experienced. The literary form of “The Guest Who Came In”–in which the protagonist meets a figure who at first appears to be a normal human being but who, little by little, shows himself worthy of being called the protagonist’s master and rabbi, and who can fly with the protagonist to upper worlds,55 and the protagonist’s meeting with wondrous objects such as the golden tree–blends naturally with the literature of the Zohar. But here it is important to note the difference between Rabbi Nachman’s story and this literary tradition. The fact that the story’s rendition of clinging in thought is an integral, vital part of the story denotes that the story is describing mystical consciousness. The guest’s words make it clear that the story is not dealing with an external plot that possesses a mythological cast but with a story of consciousness, a story of the neshamah. Not only does the story focus on the yearnings and fears of the neshamah, but the entire narrative reality is that of consciousness. The journey through space, the leaving the house and return to the house, the flight through the air, the descent to the valley and the ascent to the mountain–all of these represent the reality of consciousness that has no connection to kilometers and spatiality.56 It is thus possible to say that “The Guest Who Came In” focuses on the flow of mystical consciousness–from the arousal of the householder’s yearning for holiness to his attaining a mystical state of consciousness that shapes the awareness of a reality entirely different from that which exists in the regular world of people. This process is reminiscent of that described above in “State of consciousness: Sleep, dream, vision, waking state and alertness” (in the previous chapter), which demonstrated that “The Story of the Bread” too describes a gradually intensifying passage from regular consciousness to a spiritual, mystical consciousness that perceives in every entity the spiritual letters that give it being, the word of the Lord that is present and revealed in it.

55 Similarly, the sages in the Zohar meet with figures such as a donkey-driver, a cripple or a child–figures who, they learn after conversation with them, are exalted beings who know the secrets of heaven, a few of which they reveal. Many scholars have dealt with this motif. See, for instance, Oron, “‘Simini kechotam,’” pp. 3–5; Hellner-Eshed, A River Flows from Eden, pp. 54–56; Yisraeli, Parshanut HaSod, pp. 51–79; Ben Harosh, “Sodo shel yenuka,” in particular p. 108. 56 This contrasts with many stories in the Zohar in which the heavenly journey is presented as a movement not only of the spirit but of the body as well. See Hellner-Eshed, A River Flows from Eden, p. 56. For a detailed example of the mythopoeic objective in zoharic literature, in whose framework the literary and homiletic means shape the mythical figures, see Ben Harosh, “Sodo shel yenuka.”

112 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

“Like a person leaving his house” Until now, I quoted statements of the Baal Shem Tov and other Hasidic sources that can provide an ideational and experiential context to the state of consciousness that is presented in this story. Now I will address aspects of the mystical consciousness described in this story that differentiate it from the descriptions of mystical consciousness quoted in the name of the Baal Shem Tov. To this end, I will compare the story to a passage from Tzava’at HaRivash,57 which calls upon a person to cause his thoughts to cling to the upper world. And [a person] should think, “I always want to give [God] pleasure and serve Him always.” And his thought should always cling to the upper world [and be immersed] in [God], be He blessed. And that is alluded to in the verse, “And he shall not go forth from the sanctuary” [Leviticus 21:21]. And when a person speaks at length [alternative version: and when a person must speak] of this-worldly matters, he should consider that he is descending from the supernal world, like a person leaving his house, who intends to return immediately and who, as he goes along, thinks about when he will be returning to his house. Thus should a person always think that his primary home is in the upper world, [immersed] in the Creator, be He blessed, even when he is speaking of this-worldly matters. And he should immediately bring his thought back to [its] original attachment. And this is [the meaning of] David’s statement to his son, Solomon: “I am going the way of all the earth” [I Kings 2:2]–meaning, like a person going along the way whose thought and desire are in the greatest hurry to return to his house.58

The Baal Shem Tov too deals with the question of migration from world to world and with the tension between a person’s existence in the upper world, to which his thought should always be clinging, and his existence in this world, which involves conversation with people. The Baal Shem Tov too compares one state of consciousness to a person at home and another to “a person leaving his house.” The Baal Shem Tov’s images also emphasize the feelings of unfamiliarity and transience that beset the person who leaves his house. 57 The question of the degree to which it is possible to see Tzava’at HaRivash as a record of the Baal Shem Tov’s words is embroiled in controversy. See Gris, Sifrut HaHanhagut, pp. 149–181; Elior, “R. Yosef Caro vehaBesht,” p. 690 note 41; ibid., The Mystical Origins of Hasidism, pp. 59–63. My own view tends to that of Elior: the fact that Tzava’at HaRivash contains statements in the name of the Baal Shem Tov that are quoted by Rabbi Yaakov Yosef and other sources indicates that it authentically represents the Baal Shem Tov’s words. At any rate, the present comparative discussion attempting to define the character of Bratslavian mysticism does not necessitate rendering a verdict on this point. 58 Tzava’at HaRivash, 84, p. 14.



The guest’s explanation: bringing the mystical element to the forefront 

 113

But it is instructive to note that whereas for the Baal Shem Tov the person’s house is the upper world (“his primary world is in the upper world, [immersed] in the Creator, be He blessed”), in Rabbi Nachman’s story the person’s house is in this world (“he saw that he was in his house … speaking with people and eating and drinking as everyone does”) whereas the householder’s leaving the house constitutes his ascent and flight to upper worlds. Another difference between these presentations of mystical consciousness is the measure of a person’s control in his state of consciousness. Whereas the householder in Rabbi Nachman’s story is “kidnapped” by his thoughts and yearnings, and led by them against his will here and there, the mystic whom the Baal Shem Tov addresses is expected to achieve complete control of his thoughts so that he can determine what world he will cling to and be immersed in. It is possible that these differences express two different points of view regarding the ideal persona of the mystic and how much of a personal connection with this world he should maintain. However, it is also possible that they describe different stages or levels in the mystic’s development. Rabbi Nachman is describing the initial steps of the novice mystic, who is confused by the new and unfamiliar state in which he finds himself, which he does not adequately comprehend.59 On the other hand, the Baal Shem Tov is describing the consciousness of a skilled mystic who is able to steer himself to his desired state of consciousness, whose sojourn in the upper world is so familiar and ordinary to him that he regards it as his home to which he is returning.60 The discussion has until this point not addressed the contents revealed to the householder at the time of his mystical experience, and for good reason. In this story, the focus is more on the character of the mystical experience and its causes than on the contents that it reveals. Nevertheless, clarifying the nature of the world that is revealed to the householder and, moreover, what he feels about that world is vital in understanding the character of the mystical experience and the state of consciousness that it shapes.

59 At the end of the chapter, I will propose another explanation. 60 It is possible that these differences also express various states of the nefesh that the Baal Shem Tov and Rabbi Nachman were experiencing. The Baal Shem Tov’s descriptions regarding his ascents of the neshamah give the impression of a skilled mystic who is aware of his important place in the supernal worlds, where he acts confidently and decisively (see on this Etkes, The Besht, pp. 79–101). It is important to note that at the beginning of his mystical career, the Baal Shem Tov too had difficulty in combining his clinging to the supernal world with the need “to speak of this-worldly matters”–so much so that he had an accident when he drove the wagon of his brother-in-law, Rabbi Gershon, and people around him considered him to be insane. Regarding this, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 26–28 (in the Hebrew edition only).

114 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

4 What was revealed to the householder’s soul in flight After a long period of repeated flight and return home, the householder lands in the valley of another world, where for the first time he has the opportunity to look around. The first object that he comes upon is a book. The narrator, who is close to the householder’s point of view, does not describe the exact contents of the book but only those details that may be distinguished in a cursory glance. The book contains letter combinations and illustrations of vessels that contain letters, among which are letters with whose help one can make those self-same vessels. This mystifying book arouses the householder’s “tremendous desire to learn that book.” However, before he manages to realize his desire, his stay “there” is cut short with a return to his house. When he subsequently comes back, he does not return to this book but decides to climb the mountain. On it, he finds a golden tree that has the appearance of, or that actualizes, what was illustrated in the book. Hanging upon the tree branches are vessels, which contain other vessels that made them. Since the reader is told that the vessels on the tree are similar to the vessels in the book, he learns that the book’s letters within vessels are parallel to the tree’s vessels within vessels, and that the connection between vessels and letters implies certain links of identity between them. The story explains neither the nature of the book nor the meaning of the tree of vessels. But there is no doubt that they derive from the diverse kabbalistic domain–filled with concepts of tree, letters and vessels–which comprises the background to their appearance in this story.

The world of letters The world revealed to the householder’s soul is filled with letters. Letters are manifest in every object that he comes upon. At first he sees a book, where one would expect to find letters, and they are indeed to be found in it. But unlike the letters in any other book, these letters are more than an element that creates words and sentences, the units of meaning that the reader relates to. Rather, they remain as letter combinations that do not turn into words, such as “azach is dalet, and so on.” Within these combinations, the letter remains as a unit of meaning to which the reader is meant to relate and which he is meant to decipher. In addition, the book contains illustrations of vessels. But these vessels too contain letters and are made of letters. As for the tree at the top of the mountain, it is revealed to be a tree of letters, for the fruits hanging on its branches are the same as the vessels that the house-



What was revealed to the householder’s soul in flight 

 115

holder saw in the book–i.e., vessels that contain letters and that are made of letters. The space in which the householder’s consciousness soars matches well the climate of Jewish secret teachings. In early secret traditions and in kabbalistic thought in its various streams, from its inception to Hasidism, pride of place is given to letters and “letter combinations.”61 The world was created with letters and it endures due to the letters that exist in every entity, as Rabbi Nachman explains in Likutei Moharan. As a result, the power of the letters of the Holy Tongue that exist in everything in the world is aroused and increased, for every object contains a number of letter combinations, with which that object was created…. Thus was the power of the Lord expanded and aroused in the Work of Creation–that [power] being the letters that are in everything in the world.62

The letter combination, “azach is dalet,” is not common in kabbalistic literature, and I was unable to find it mentioned anywhere. I cannot determine whether it was made up for this story, or existed earlier.63 Either way the combination appears in the story unexplained and undeciphered. It remains incomprehensi61 See above, Chapter 1, note 21. 62 Likutei Moharan I 19:6. 63 The letter combination “azach” is found in Rashi in Eruvin (56a), its source possibly being Pirkei DeRebbe Eliezer (see Peirush Radal LePirkei DeRebbe Eliezer, Chapter 6, Section 23, p. 14a). Bratslav commentary cites a tradition that associates “azach is dalet” with Hanukkah. Regarding the passage in Chayei Moharan, “Hanukkah, 5569 … A guest entered … azach is dalet” (see there), our Hasidim said that this is alluded to in Likutei Moharan I 2:2, which our rebbe delivered that year. And that is as follows. The letters of the Hebrew word for “guest,” ore’ach, may be rearranged to form the phrase, ohr chet, “light of eight.” This corresponds to the light of the eight days of Hanukkah. In the phrase, “azach is dalet,” the letter alef–which has the numerical value of one–alludes to the level of the light of truth, for “truth is one.” The letter zayin alludes to the level of the three Divine names, El Elokim Hashem, by means of which the four parts of speech are perfected. The letter zayin alludes to this [in that it has the numerical value of seven, and thus] is a combination of three [(the three Divine names)] and four [(the four parts of speech)]. Chet [has the numerical value of eight, and thus alludes to] the eight days of Hanukkah. And [azach can] also [be divided into the phrase,] az-chet, because [the word] az alludes to the level of speech of malkhut. As the verse states, “Your throne is established from the beginning” [Psalms 92:3]–[the “throne” corresponds to malkhut, and the Hebrew for “from the beginning” is “from az.”… And that is the meaning of “azach is dalet,” [“dalet” having the numerical value of four]– because the principal thing is perfection of speech: i.e., the “square” of speech, which includes blessing and holiness–i.e., the Holy Tongue…. Rabbi Levi Yitzhak Bender, in Nachal Soreik, 998

116 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

ble to the reader, and (as will appear later on) to the householder as well–which is how kabbalistic letter combinations appear to a person who is not initiated into the knowledge of their meaning.

Letters, vessels and tree The book, which contains letter combinations and images of vessels that contain letters, visually accords with many kabbalah books that, in addition to their discussions of letter combinations, contain illustrations of circles or squares that contain letter combinations, references to sefirot, names of God and so forth.64 The tree and the vessels of letters growing upon it also appear in illustrations of “the tree of sefirot”65 in kabbalistic literature. In these illustrations, the tree of sefirot and its branches appear at times with the “tree” being composed of concentric circles in which names of the sefirot and letter combinations are placed.66 In addition to the visual aspect, kabbalistic and Hasidic literature portray in various contexts relationships of identification, absorption and action between the letters and vessels.67 In Pardes Rimonim, Rabbi Moshe Cordovero states: “It is known that the letters in [the realm of] spirituality emanate from the supernal roots. And [those letters] are vessels and palaces in relation to those honored roots. They are the sefirot.”68

I do not find that the teaching from Likutei Moharan to which Rabbi Levi Yitzhak alludes provides a persuasive basis for this commentary, a commentary that understands the letter combination as relating to the time at which “The Guest Who Came In” was told (on Hanukkah), but that does not explain the place of this letter combination in the story itself. 64 For example, see Sefer HaKaneh, pp. 172–174; Ginat Egoz, p. 336; Shushan Sodot, p. 33; Elior, Galya Razya, pp. 62, 63, 64. 65 A fascinating collection of images of the tree of the sefirot in the literature of Jewish mysticism and in Christian kabbalah may be found in Roob’s The Hermetic Museum, pp. 310–328. 66 See Scholem, Pirkei Yesod, pp. 176–178. And see for example the attached illustration (from Pa’amon VeRimon], published in Amsterdam, 1708), at the top of which is written, “I have placed before you a form of the tree … on the ladder whose top reaches the heavens.” This illustration too clearly depicts the branches of the tree as connected to and entangled with each other. 67 “Also [in the book,] inside the vessels were the letters referring to those vessels–that is, using those letters, one could make those vessels…. On the branches [of the tree] hung vessels like those that had been illustrated in the book. Inside these vessels were tools by means of which one could make the vessels.” 68 Pardes Rimonim, Gate 9, Chapter 3, p. 57.



What was revealed to the householder’s soul in flight 

 117

And Rabbi Chaim Vital writes in Eitz Chaim: “And it is known that all of the vessels are made from the letters.”69 The cyclical structure–vessels that are letters, with which vessels and letters are made–is also to be found in the kabbalistic literature. Sefer HaPeliah writes, “See and understand, for these letters are the vessels of the Holy One, blessed be He. Each one has the power to bring to birth a letter like itself.”70 And there is visual expression of this in the kabbalistic literature as well.71 (See photographs 3–4 in Appendix 3). I wish to make it clear that it is not my intention in these abbreviated quotations to explain the symbolic meaning of the objects that the householder encounters. In fact, as I will later demonstrate, lack of clarity and vagueness are essential elements of the role that they play in the story. Nevertheless, these sources show that the vision of the householder’s soul is incontrovertibly based upon well-known kabbalistic concepts and symbols. I will now address the extent of the householder’s understanding of what he sees.

“He had a tremendous desire to learn that book … he wanted to take the vessels but he couldn’t” The book arouses the householder’s strong desire to learn and understand it, but he does not succeed in doing so, for “meanwhile, he saw that he was back in his house.” His return to the house cuts short the possibility of learning the book, and its contents remain an unsolved riddle. The householder’s encounter with the tree ends similarly: the tree arouses his desire to take the vessels and understand their nature–but “he couldn’t, because

69 Eitz Chaim, Part 1, p. 263, and similarly in other sources. See, for example, ibid., Part 2, p. 66; ibid., p. 90. 70 Sefer HaPeliah (5737), p. 71. Regarding “letters and prayers like vessels” in Hasidism, see Idel, Hasidism: Between Ecstasy and Magic, pp. 160–170. 71 I am referring to images of hollow letters that contain other letters of the names of God or letter combinations. See, for example, Adam Yashar, 73b; Biur Sefer Yetzirah, p. 19. The last picture is fascinating and unique, for it visually blends the tree and letters (the letter alef with other letters in and around it), and the writer contends that “this is the form that I saw in the kabbalistic books that point out the existence of the plantings, and that are included in the form of the tree,” and “this is the form of the alef mentioned in [relation to] the sefirot” (ibid.). These statements teach that images of this type existed in earlier kabbalistic literature. Subsequent kabbalistic works contain similar images, presumably influenced by this book. See, for example, Pardes Rimonim, Part 1, Gate 5, Chapter 6, p. 27b.

118 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

they were entangled in the crooked branches.72 Meanwhile, he saw that he was back in his house.” He returns from the tree empty-handed, the vessels remaining in the tangle of branches, uncomprehended.73 The householder’s difficulty in understanding the book and the vessels and letters is described in the story as deriving from two causes: first, Jewish mystical ideas are often concealed in the shadow of letter combinations and in the shade of crooked and entangled branches, and second, mystical experience is itself transient in nature.74 The householder’s flight to the upper world and his encounter with it are cut short while incomplete. In addition, the flight and encounter occur in the course of a nerve-wracking process of travel and return75 that does not permit him the long and quiet period of reflection needed to learn, understand and assimilate his experiences. These factors blend together so that the feeling of unfamiliarity characteristic of the mystical journey does not fade away even in the journey’s later stages. Also, when the householder looks at the kabbalistic book and when he sees the tree, his sense of unfamiliarity and his lack of comprehension intensify and deepen.

72 A description of the tree of sefirot as possessing tangled branches is found in the writing of Rabbi Moshe Cordovero: “Behold, that is the tree, amidst the six points. And so is it called tiferet, related to the word p’arot, meaning ‘branches.’ And that is to say that it grasps and spreads and branches out and grows entangled in the sefirot” (Pardes Rimonim, Part 1, Gate 21, Chapter 6, p. 100a). 73 The challenge of explaining the meaning of reaching the great tree faced Rabbi Nachman when he discoursed on the mirabilia stories of Rabbah bar bar Hana: “‘He rose and sat in a tree.’ That means that [the person] attains the level of the hidden Torah … the dwelling place of souls. As stated, ‘All souls come forth from the great tree’ (Zohar, Part 2 [“Parshat Mishpatim”] p. 99b). And it corresponds to the world-to-come” (Likutei Moharan I 15:5). Rabbi Nachman explains reaching the tree as understanding the hidden Torah, which is associated with souls flying to the tree of souls, which corresponds to the world-to-come, the supernal world. It should be pointed out in this context that Rabbi Nachman and other Hasidic thinkers explain the attainment of the hidden Torah not as the attainment of esoteric knowledge but as personal mystical experience. Regarding this, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 58–61. 74 Regarding transience as characterizing the mystical experience, see James, The Varieties of Religious Experience, p. 278. 75 Regarding transience as characterizing the mystical way of the Baal Shem Tov, see Etkes, The Besht, pp. 112, 131–135. Rabbi Nachman’s description here of the element of a return from mystical experience as occurring against one’s will contrasts with his words elsewhere, where he describes the return from mystical experience as a conscious choice and not a forced process (see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 33–38). It is possible that there is a disparity between Rabbi Nachman’s homiletic discourses and his literary writing, the latter describing the less illuminating aspects of mysticism. Alternatively, this story might be describing a change in Rabbi Nachman’s mystical world and in the measure of his self-confidence as a mystic.



What was revealed to the householder’s soul in flight 

 119

The householder’s yearning to learn and understand remains unfulfilled throughout the story. Although the guest promises explicitly, “I will learn with you,” he does not fulfill his promise at any stage of the story–certainly not completely. Both at the beginning of the story, when the householder requests, “Please teach me,” and toward its end, when the householder “began to plead with [the guest] to come to him,” the guest replies with the same set phrase–“I don’t have time”–and evades teaching the householder. In this regard, comparison with the stories of the Zohar is instructive. A large number of stories from the literature of the Zohar present encounters with a figure who at first appears to be simple–whether a child or an old man–but who is later revealed to be a supernatural figure who takes the protagonist on a heavenly journey and reveals secrets and mysteries to him.76 Rabbi Nachman’s story also has a supernatural figure who at first appears as a simple person, but who in the end takes the protagonist on a heavenly journey. However, in conspicuous contrast to the Zohar, this figure does not fulfill his promises to teach the mysteries of the world. The householder’s experience and flight through the upper worlds do not lead to clarity. Instead, he remains confused by the world that has been revealed to him, a world that stays unfamiliar and inaccessible. This is especially pronounced at the conclusion. The story ends with an utterance that blends the voice of the narrator with that of the householder: “I don’t know what world he is from, [but] he is certainly from a good world. And it is still not finished, and it has not concluded.” Even after the householder has flown in the upper worlds and seen the books, vessels, letter combinations and golden tree, he remains in a state of unclarity, of “I don’t know.” It is true that he accompanies his lack of knowledge with the statement that the guest “is certainly from a good world,” for the guest’s source is in yearnings for holiness, which are certainly related to the good world. But this statement does not eradicate the unequivocal declaration of the householder and the narrator as one: “I don’t know.” The story concludes on this note of lack of knowledge, which becomes the possession of the reader, remaining with him after he finishes reading. The lack of knowledge and the doubts that tinge the householder’s mystical experience have another dimension that I will now address.

76 See Hellner-Eshed, A River Flows from Eden, pp. 56–58. For an example of this, see below, Appendix 1.

120 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

5 The demonic contingency The possibility that the guest is demonic arises when the householder expresses his fear that the guest “isn’t a human being at all.” This fear does not fade as the story continues with a description of the guest’s supernatural abilities–i.e., his seizing of the householder by means of taking his neshamah. These raise the possibility that the guest is not a representative of holiness but a demonic reification of the powers of evil, Satan and the evil inclination. This demonic contingency is supported by fact that dark extra-narrative baggage often adheres to stories about an alien and unidentified guest.77 In this context, one may see a parallel between the process described in this story–in which the unfamiliar guest gains dominance until he turns into the host–and the characterization of the activity of Satan and the evil inclination in the midrash and Zohar.78 A midrash interprets the verse, “At the entrance sin crouches,”79 as describing the way of the evil inclination. “Rabbi Yitzhak said: At first, [the evil inclination] is a guest, and then it becomes the householder.”80 According to this midrash, the verse personifies sin as a demonic entity crouching and lying in wait at the entrance of a person’s house. At a certain point, it crosses the threshold and enters as a guest, and afterwards it dominates the house and becomes its master. 77 The Talmud describes more than once how Satan appears as a poor person who seeks to be hosted in someone’s house or to participate in a celebration of some kind, at which time his appearance threatens the well-being of the householder or chief celebrant. Such is the case in the story of Pelimo, to whom Satan appears as a poor person stubbornly demanding to be hosted in his home (b. Kiddushin 81a–b). Similarly, a zoharic story tells how Satan appeared as a poor person on the day that Isaac was weaned, and no one properly hosted him (Zohar, Part 1, (“Hakdamah”), p. 10b). Regarding the Talmudic sages’ fondness for this motif, see Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews, Volume 1, p. 272, and note 226]. In his essay, “Hakallah veshivat hakabtzanim” on the sources of the framework story of “The Story of the Seven Beggars,” Avidav Lipsker discusses the narrative function of “the pauper who attends a wedding.” A considerable part of the materials and narrative structures that Lipsker discusses are relevant to the narrative function that may be termed “the guest who comes to the householder.” Both the pauper and the guest (whether or not he is poor) bear a double-valence: demonically threatening, but also angelic, positive and liberating. Further on, I will give an example of this double-valence applying to the householder in “The Guest Who Came In” (although he is not described as being a pauper). 78 “The Satan and the evil inclination are one and the same” (b. Bava Batra 15b). 79 Genesis 4:7. 80 Bereishit Rabbah (Mirkin) 22:6, s.v. lefetach chatat rovetz. b. Succah quotes this statement in the name of Rava without associating it with the verse, “At the entrance, sin crouches” (Succah 52b).



The demonic contingency 

 121

In this light, the householder’s fear of going to the door may be understood, for that is where Satan and sin crouch, seeking to dominate him. This also sheds light on the words of the guest, who tells the householder that even in his house he is no longer master, for the guest has already taken over his house, and “[i]f I wanted to do anything to you even now, who could stop me?” The householder, having lost dominion over his house, fails to overcome this Satan–in contrast to the continuation of the verse, which states that “its desire is to you, but you will rule over it.”81 The Zohar (Parshat V’Etchanan) expands upon the image of the demonic guest who takes control of the householder: Rabbi Chiya said: When the evil inclination comes to bind itself to a person, it is like a person who approaches the entrance. When it sees that no one protests against it, it enters the house and becomes a guest. If it sees that no one protests against it, it acts freely. Once it has entered the house and no one protests against it, it takes control of [the house] and becomes the householder, until the whole house stands in its domain.82

In this passage, the guest is able to enter and transform himself into the householder because, as the Zohar explains, “no one protests against it.”83 And in “The Guest Who Came In,” the guest uses similar phraseology to describe his domination over the house and householder: “If I wanted to do anything to you even now, who could stop me?” The demonic aspects of the guest emerge as the story continues. He is described as a powerful supernatural being with belligerent and violent characteristics: he threatens, kidnaps, seizes the householder’s neshamah and stubbornly refuses the householder’s pleas to learn with him. Sensitive to the menace implicit in the guest, the householder suspects that “perhaps this isn’t a human being” and wonders, “Who knows who he really is?” At the beginning of the story, he fears going out with him, and at the end he is still plagued by the question of which world the guest comes from. In addition to the demonic characteristics exhibited by this domineering guest, there is the extra-narrative baggage that views a figure of this sort as a reification of the evil inclination and Satan.84 81 Genesis 4:7. 82 The translation is based on Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh, Volume 9, p. 391. 83 In the language of the Zohar: “that there is no one who will protest against it.” 84 Consequent to the midrashim quoted above and to the Talmudic source in b. Succah 52b. In Hasidic writings before and after Rabbi Nachman, the evil inclination is described as to a guest who dominates the householder. See, for instance, Toldot Ya’akov Yosef (“Parshat Re’eh,” 3), p. 648; Kedushat Levi, Part 12, pp. 388–289.

122 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

Rabbi Natan, Rabbi Nachman’s preeminent student and the amanuensis who wrote down “The Guest Who Came In,” composed a personal prayer that constitutes a fascinating testimony to the deep internalization of the negative valence of the concept of the guest. Lord, God, You know our lowliness and our weakness at this present time … because, due to our sins, we have made no effort to expel the guest from our midst, until he has become like the householder, heaven forbid, so much so that our strength has weakened and our hand has dropped in weakness.85

Nevertheless, all of this cannot nullify the positive aspects of the guest in the story, as explained in detail throughout this chapter. The guest brings the householder to supernal worlds, the experience of which comprises an answer–limited though it may be–to the householder’s yearnings for holiness. And, as will be shown further on, the extra-narrative baggage that the guest brings with him is not univalent but contains positive materials that associate the guest with the realm of holiness and angels. Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov, Rabbi Nachman’s uncle, preserved the words of Rabbi Nachman’s great-grandfather, the Baal Shem Tov, about the figure of the guest in the following exposition of how Abraham hosted guests. [Abraham told his guests, who were in actuality disguised angels,] “Please take a little water … and rest under the tree, and I will take a loaf of bread…” (Genesis 18:4). The [commentary,] Ohr HaChaim, interpreted “water” as referring to the straightforward Torah and “a loaf of bread” to the inner Torah regarding the spiritual refinement of the angels, and so forth. (See there at length.) I will follow this approach, in accordance with the ability that the Lord has given me in His vast compassion and vast kindness, and in accordance with what I learned from my master, my forebear, my grandfather (his soul is in Eden, may his memory be for the life of the world-to-come), on the topic of the entrance to the inn of Torah, that “the guest who comes brings Torah to the householder, and in accordance with [the quality of] the guest, so is the [quality] of the Torah that is revealed to the host.” Until here are his holy words…. And this [may be applied to] the words of the verse, “And rest under the tree,”86 [emphasizing] the definite article: “the [tree]”–i.e., the Torah, which is [called] a “tree of life for those who grasp it” [Proverbs 3:18]. As the Ohr HaChaim wrote, the angels came [to Abraham to be refreshed by] the Torah…. And that is in accordance with a passage in the holy Zohar (Volume 1, p. 102b): “[Abraham] would test guests with the tree.” That is to say, by means of the [nature of the] Torah [that

85 Likutei Tefillot, Part 1, Prayer 8, p. 32. 86 Genesis 18:4.



The demonic contingency 

 123

he understood], which is the tree, he would know about the guests and their nature. [That is] because the revelation of Torah to the householder is in accordance with the [quality of the] guest.87

The patriarch Abraham, who is referred to here as the householder, brought unfamiliar guests into his home and gave them food and drink. Only later on, when he engaged them in conversation, did he realize that they were not human beings but angels who possessed supernal knowledge. And he knew this because he accompanied the guests to the “tree”–i.e., the tree of life, the book of the Torah, as a result of which he attained a revelation of Torah.88 The Hasidic interpretations–whether of the Baal Shem Tov or of Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov–develop a literary form that was already set forth in the scriptural story: that of the unfamiliar guest who is revealed to be an angelic ambassador of God. The concept of the ushpizin is another important cultural artifact that bolsters the view of the guest as an ambassador of the supernal world. The Aramaic word, ushpiz (pl., ushpizin), simply means ‘guest.’ But due to the influence of the Zohar89 and the kabbalistic tradition, ushpizin has become a term known in all Jewish communities as describing the guests who descend from the supernal world to a person’s succah every day of the holiday of Succot, when the host invites them to enter and join his meal.90 Thus, although the extra-narrative baggage around the figure of the guest has negative connotations, it also presents him as an angelic, positive entity coming from the supernal world. The complex nature of the figure of the guest adds a note of tension to the householder’s mystical experience, and his lack of knowledge makes him incapable of properly evaluating the guest’s moral character and the events that the guest precipitates, for good or ill.91 The householder’s tension concerning the guest apparently diminishes as the story continues. The householder’s suspicion and fear appear primarily at the start of the story, at the start of the process that he undergoes. Once he sees that the guest has taken the trouble to give him food, 87 Degel Machaneh Efraim (“Parshat VaYeira,” s.v. yukah), p. 20. 88 Following Maimonides’ view that this episode took place not in external reality but in a prophetic vision (Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, 2:42, pp. 388–390), the parallel to the present tale is exact. Both sources describe a vision about guests who enter into the householder’s domain, where they encounter a tree that is a book, which is the Torah. 89 Zohar, Part 3, (“Emor”), p. 104a. 90 The guests are the seven shepherds: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, David. 91 Regarding similar occurrences of mystics who had an overtly mystical experience but were confused by whether it belonged to the world of holiness or to the world of impurity, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 33–35, and note 61 (in the Hebrew edition only).

124 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

a garment and drink, and that the guest even explains what the householder is undergoing, the householder’s fear of the guest fades. Finally, at the end of the story the householder decides, clearly and firmly, that the guest “is certainly from a good world,” indicating the eradication of his fear that the guest comes from the world of evil. I do not intend to dispute this conclusion, which I certainly think constitutes the dominant tone at the end of the story. However, it is also proper to ask whether this conclusion, reached by the householder and narrator in their unified expression at the end of the story, is also that of the hidden author. Perhaps the extra-narrative cultural baggage around the figure of the guest, augmented by his violent and suspicious behavior throughout the story, trumps the decisive and optimistic conclusion of the householder and narrator, or at least casts a shadow of doubt on it. This question is strengthened by the menacing tone of the guest’s final words describing the flight of the householder: “I took your neshamah”– i.e., an event that occurred not with the householder’s consent but against his will. Moreover, it is possible that the story’s final statement, which apparently offers a positive verdict, undermines itself. This is because the assertion, “he is certainly from a good world,” is sandwiched inbetween the phrases, “I don’t know what world he is from,” and “it is still not finished, and it has not concluded.” These phrases represent the realm of doubt and nescience. They blend the certain into the doubtful and raise the difficulty of deciding the nature and disposition of events that are “still not finished, and … not concluded.” Nevertheless, it appears that this reservation about proclaiming utter certainty does not in essence undermine the conclusion reached by the householder and narrator. Rather, it limits the realm to which that conclusion applies. The demonic contingency is rejected–the guest “is certainly from a good world”– but the doubt and lack of knowledge constitute part of the hazy character of the householder’s mystical experience and the questions that attend it (as has been described at length in the course of this chapter). The combination of absolute certainty on the one hand and lack of knowledge and an open ending on the other recalls the concluding sentence of Rabbi Nachman’s “Story of the Lost Princess”: “And how he brought her out he did not tell, but at the end he brought her out.” There as well the assurance is joined by an accompanying lack of knowledge and uncertainty.



The character of the mystical experience and the way in which it is fashioned 

 125

6 The character of the mystical experience and the way in which it is fashioned 1. This story may be described as being built in two stages, which work their way to completion on a number of thematic levels. The first thematic level concerns the existential state of the householder. He experiences an ongoing process of alienation and dissociation, a process that affects the entirety of his links with the world around him. On this level, the person’s self-reflection, his gaze upon himself, plays a central role in the formation of his dissociation from the world. Although the first stage of the story includes elements of yearning for holiness, it may be analyzed in the framework of a human being’s existential state, as described in existentialist thought and literature. This theme, with its associated meanings, develops in the first part of the story, and it can stand as such until the guest provides his explanatory words. In the second half of the story, the householder’s experience moves from yearning for holiness to a preeminently mystical experience, which he exper­ iences as flight and reaching supernal worlds. The mystical meaning of this experience is clear neither to the reader nor to the householder, until the guest provides an explanation. Without that explanation, one might have interpreted the householder’s experience without reference to mystical traditions, attributing it to the clouded space between yearning for holiness and the positive experience of being in the presence of holiness. The guest’s explanation places the experiential Rorschach test in frameworks of thought and concepts drawn from the mystical tradition. And thus the hazy experience becomes distinctly mystical. The guest’s words not only describe the householder’s self-awareness but conclude and shape the experience itself. Only now is this experience explained clearly–it is the ascent of the householder’s neshamah, generated by his clinging in thought to the higher worlds. Now the householder understands anew his experience as taking place in a mystical gestalt. The guest’s words require the reader as well to review the story and interpret it not only as an existential story but as one that is significantly mystical, moving within the tradition of known, specific conceptual frameworks. 2. It is important to emphasize that in contrast to diaries of various mystics that document their personal experiences, whose writing ordinarily does not claim to go beyond autobiography, the present story expresses itself in the form of a literary fiction. The narrator is an external figure who writes in the third person and communicates the mind of the householder by entering into his consciousness, adopting his physical and emotional points of view and offering a plot that

126 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

includes the presentation of not only what is occurring in external reality but what is occurring in the householder’s consciousness. The protagonist’s awareness is characterized by an uncontrolled racing between two states of consciousness: the regular and the mystical. The mystical consciousness is described as a journey through a world in which kabbalistic symbols appear as reified entities. They are independent beings present in the consciousness of the protagonist without passing through cogitative or psychological reduction by either the protagonist or the narrator. This runs counter to trends in the mystical narrative traditions of the Heikhalot literature and the Zohar, in which a person’s ascent to the supernal world is accompanied by learning and understanding. Unlike these–and even in contrast to them–although the householder in this story attains mystical consciousness and flies through the supernal world, he does not understand it. The book, the tree and the letters are apparently very close to him, within reach, but he does not learn the book, the guest refuses to teach him, and the vessels and the letters remain unattained in the tangle of crooked branches. The mystical realm remains foreign and closed, like an undeciphered stormy dream. The story’s realm, with its kabbalistic concepts and structures–which have a mythological cast–all are explained in the story in mystical terms as representing the mystic’s inner consciousness of reality. Although the consciousness of the protagonist remains clouded and subject to ongoing change, this realm is presented as a tangible world to which he makes his thought cling and in which he exists. The protagonist’s flow of consciousness is the establishing and organizing principle of the entire story, with all of its elements. The focus on the protagonist’s flow of consciousness leads to a lack of understanding of the symbolic elements in the story, for they are powerful elements in the person’s consciousness even if he is not aware of them and does not know their meaning.92 And that explains why the story is cut short before it concludes, for it describes a limited, although undefined,93 period of time in the consciousness of the protagonist, a conscious-

92 Regarding the tendency of a person’s “stream of consciousness” to employ symbols in a hazy way without understanding their meaning, see Auerbach, Mimesis, pp. 486–487. 93 See note 7 above regarding the fact that the date and time with which the story opens–“The first day of Hanukkah, 5569, after lighting the Hanukkah candle at night”–are not part of the story itself and do not denote the time that it occurred but the time in which Rabbi Nachman told it. The connection to consciousness explains the lack of exposition because, in keeping with the nature of the flow of consciousness, the story opens in the middle and has no end.



“The Guest Who Came In”: the autobiographical element 

 127

ness in a state of constant flow without beginning, middle and end. And thus it is like an ongoing story “that is still not finished, and it has not concluded.”94 I address the historical and intrinsic link between mysticism and the flow of consciousness in Appendix 2.

7 “The Guest Who Came In”: the autobiographical element The autobiographical aspect of “The Guest Who Came In” is not obvious and evident. This is the fifth in a series of stories of dreams and visions of Rabbi Nachman in “Sipurim Chadashim” in Chayei Moharan. The four previous stories are told in the first person.95 “The Guest Who Came In,” on the other hand, is told in the third person, and the narrator apparently does not appear as a figure in the story. “The Guest Who Came In” is followed by another dream of Rabbi Nachman in which he does not appear as a character. These are followed by two dream narratives in which Rabbi Nachman is the narrator who appears in the dream. In light of this, it cannot be assumed on the basis of the placement of the story that it has an autobiographical aspect–i.e., that one of its characters represents Rabbi Nachman. Some argue that Rabbi Nachman is the hidden protagonist of all of his teachings and stories, including those in which he does not explicitly appear. This argument has gained acceptance in traditional interpretation and serves as a touchstone96 of many academic studies of Rabbi Nachman.97 If this assumption is

94 Regarding this characteristic in “stream of consciousness” writing, see Mendilov, Ba’ayat HaZman BeSiporet, pp. 160–165. 95 To exclude very brief dreams of a few lines. 96 “It is known that every teaching that he delivered was principally about himself and his attainment at that time” (Avaneha Barzel, 66, p. 80); “there is no expression in all of the Sipurei HaMa’asiyot that is not referring to the figure of the man Nachman of Bratslav” (Weiss, Mechkarim, p. 152); “One cannot understand the homiletical teachings in Likutei Moharan without knowing the circumstances of their being delivered (thus also in the opinion of Bratslav Hasidism). This is because the man who delivers them and his particular situation at the time of the delivery are the principal matter, and not the content of the teaching in and of itself” (Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 240). 97 So in Joseph Weiss (see the previous note) and also in Arthur Green, who wrote that “throughout both Nahman’s teachings and his stories, Weiss has shown, the central figure of concern is none other than Nahman himself. This most basic insight of Weiss … is also a cornerstone of our present study” (Green, Tormented Master, p. 17–18; but see also a certain reservation on pp. 346–347, 353). Piekarz attacked this assumption sharply. See Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 10, 226–236.

128 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

accepted, then “The Guest Who Came In” must be read as exhibiting Rabbi Nachman’s personal, mystical world (although that is never explicitly stated). I do not think that one needs to adopt this assumption in its most extreme version, which states that there is no expression and story of Rabbi Nachman that is not focused on his figure. However, there is no doubt that Rabbi Nachman’s writings, whether homiletic or narrative, bear an outstanding personal character. Therefore, a search for the personal and the autobiographical level in his creativity is possible and probably even requisite. Nevertheless, this is not a binding and unbending postulate but only an interpretive possibility, which must be reexamined with the study of every story and discourse. The previous chapter, which was dedicated to “The Story of the Bread,” showed that although that story is told in the third person, a cluster of allusions indicates that the protagonist “tender in years” is Rabbi Nachman and that his “grandfather” is the Baal Shem Tov. As discussed above, Rabbi Nachman refrained from explicitly stating this probable identification, and even threatened his Hasidim when they inquired regarding the matter. It appears that the householder, the central figure of “The Guest Who Came In,” serves as a way of presenting a mystical experience that Rabbi Nachman underwent, although the hints to that are less prominent and are different in their nature than those in “The Story of the Bread.” I will begin my presentation of this claim by quoting a different interpretation of the story, one that appears in Siach Sarfei Kodesh. In Chayei Moharan 85, “The Guest Who Came In” …, “The householder began to long and yearn deeply to know how one arrives at a certain level of holiness. The guest told him, ‘I will learn with you.’”… Our Hasidim (may their memory be for a blessing) stated that this means that the tzaddik, who is the guest, comes to a person and teaches him everything, but only after the person is inspired on his own with an arousal from below, and he seeks and searches repeatedly after the teacher. (Transcriber’s note: See in Likutei Moharan [I] 209 that the tzaddik is called “guest,” as in the verse, “And the way of tzaddikim is like a shining light” (Proverbs 4:18). [The Hebrew word for ‘way,’ orach, may be read as the word ore’ach, ‘guest.’] See there). And this inspiration itself comes to a person from the words of the tzaddik, the guest, who comes to him in a concealed fashion. But after [the tzaddik] awakens [the person], if [the person] does not ask [the tzaddik] to teach him, [the tzaddik] will learn with him no more. And only after [the tzaddik] sees [the person’s] self-awakening–in that [the person] is searching after [the tzaddik]–does [the tzaddik] turn to him and say to him, “I will learn with you.”98

98 Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 1, 314, pp. 136–137.



“The Guest Who Came In”: the autobiographical element 

 129

This interpretation of “our Hasidim” identifies the tzaddik with the guest, and in line with that thesis explains a number of details in the story. However, it is hard to accept this reading–even in part–for it does not properly describe the details that it comes to explain. According to this interpretation, the guest, who is the tzaddik, come to a person “and teaches him everything.” However, as noted earlier, the guest defers the householder’s request to learn with him, telling him, “I don’t have time right now. Another time, I will come and I will teach this to you.” And even later in the story he repeats, “I don’t have time, because I am going to you.” Nowhere in the story does the guest fulfill his offer, “I will teach this to you.” Also, although the householder learned much from his experience–and his flight itself contains some sort of answer to the question of how one arrives at a certain level of holiness–it is not possible to describe that episode as expressing a state in which the guest “teaches him everything,” for the outstanding characteristics of the householder’s experience are precisely a lack of comprehension, a feeling of unfamiliarity and wonder. Also, this interpretation implies that the willingness of the guest to teach the householder grew the more that the householder sought the tzaddik. But that stands in inverse relationship to the events of the story. After the householder yearns to arrive at a certain level of holiness, the guest tells him, “I will teach this to you.” But afterwards, when the householder entertains the possibility that “perhaps this isn’t a human being” and begins to call him “Rabbi” and treat him with great respect, which stabilizes their relationship as that of a Hasid and rebbe, the guest retreats from his former willingness, and he equivocates, “I don’t have time right now. Another time, I will come and I will teach this to you.” In addition, according to the interpretation of “our Hasidim,” one would have expected Rabbi Nachman, who is the tzaddik telling the story, to identify with the figure of the guest, who represents the tzaddik–but that is apparently not the case. Instead, the narrator identifies with the figure of the householder, so strongly that at last their identities merge, as I will now explain. Throughout the story, the narrator adopts the physical and mental points of view of the householder. Physically, the narrator describes only what the householder sees. As for the guest, he is at times present and at other times concealed, and the narrator refers to him only when the householder sees him: “Meanwhile, [the man] looked out the window and saw the guest.” Throughout the story, the narrator accompanies the householder in all of his frequent passages from the house to his flight, his descent to the valley and ascent to the mountain, his conversation with people and his attempts to learn from the book.

130 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

Similarly, regarding the householder’s mental point of view, the narrator enters his consciousness and communicates his yearning, his astonishment and fear, the wonder that grips him and his strong desire to communicate it to others. Conversely, the narrator does not penetrate into the mind of the guest. The reader does not know his desires, his thoughts, his goals, and the factors that guide his actions. Throughout the story, the narrator does not leave the consciousness of the householder–neither for the sake of delivering information that the householder is not privy to nor for the sake of offering independent observations of his own. The narrator completely adopts the point of view of the householder in communicating events to the reader. At the conclusion of the story, the bond between the narrator and the householder grows so strong that the border between them is blurred. After the guest answers the householder’s question, “I’m here, and what do you mean that you are going to me?” the story concludes with the statement: “I don’t know which world he is from, [but] he is certainly from a good world. And it is still not finished, and it has not concluded.” It is hard to identify who is speaking in this statement. In contrast to the story, which is told in the third person, in the concluding comment the narrator passes to the first person singular to say, “I don’t know.” It is not possible to contend that the householder is speaking to the guest, for the guest is referred to not in the second person as “you”99 but in the third person as “he.” Also, the content does not support the idea that the householder is addressing the guest. The end of the statement, “And it is still not finished, and it has not concluded,” is similarly ambiguous. If these are the words of the householder, and thus part of the story, whom is he addressing? On the other hand, the statement that the story “is still not finished, and it has not concluded,” makes it hard to see the person speaking as an all-knowing figure who takes no part in the story but stands at a magisterial distance. It therefore appears that this concluding sentence is not addressed to one of the characters in the story, but that the narrator is addressing the reader, offering a sort of summation that blends the thoughts of the householder and the words of the narrator into a single integrated expression. This combination of views, which appears solely in the concluding sentence, intensifies the narrator’s adoption of the householder’s point of view, creating the sense that throughout the story there was never a gap between the two–that the narrator is the householder, who has told what occurred to him since the time that the guest entered his house.

99 The householder repeatedly addresses the guest using the respectful plural “you” (as opposed to the familiar, singular “thou”).

 The way of mysticism: from “The Story of the Bread” to “The Guest Who Came In” 

 131

Identifying Rabbi Nachman, who narrates the story, with the householder explains the householder’s description of himself, “I don’t have a regular income in my house. I am supported by the world.” This describes the income of a Hasidic tzaddik who has no set income and whose income derives not from his house but relies upon the “world,” a term meaning the community as a whole, which supports the rebbe and provides him with his income. It is therefore probable that “The Guest Who Came In”–like the great majority of his recorded dreams and visions–is a representation of Rabbi Nachman and his mystical experiences.

8 The way of mysticism: from “The Story of the Bread” to “The Guest Who Came In” There is a conspicuous gap between the figure of Rabbi Nachman as mystic represented by the person “tender in years” in “The Story of the Bread” and that represented by the householder in “The Guest Who Came In.” Although it is clear that these stories do not describe every detail of the mystical events and visions that inspired them, and it is also known that Rabbi Nachman’s mystical world included a variety of mystical experiences, the chasm between the mystics in these two stories is striking. “The Story of the Bread” describes a powerful revelation in the course of which the person “tender in years” attains a new giving of the Torah. The Ten Commandments, the entire Torah and all that a seasoned student will in the future innovate issue forth from his mouth. As discussed earlier, the nature and intensity of this revelation create the potential to establish a new Torah and new religion no longer reliant on the Torah of Moses and the mediation of the tradition, for everything that had ever been said and innovated is revealed to this person “tender in years.” At the conclusion of this revelation, this person has attained the level of Moses, receiving the Torah in its entirety directly from the Creator of the world. It would be difficult to depict any greater self-confidence in the mystical realm and any higher self-awareness as a mystic. In complete contrast, “The Guest Who Came In” describes the experience of a hesitant and diffident mystic. The householder does not know where he is or how he is flying, and he does not understand the visions he is having of the supernal world. He sees the letter combinations, tree and vessels, but he does not understand them, nor can he clarify the identity and origin of the guest who seized him. This chapter contrasted the householder’s uncertainty in the mystical world, to which he was taken by force and through which he traveled as a stranger, with the Baal Shem Tov’s directive that a person should see the upper world as his

132 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

home, and the Baal Shem Tov’s expectation that a person should navigate his mystical experiences with complete control. These dissimilarities possibly represent different stages in the mystic’s development. Rabbi Nachman describes the first steps of the beginning mystic, whose confusion stems from the new and unknown personal state in which he finds himself and which he does not satisfactorily understand; conversely, the Baal Shem Tov describes the consciousness of the skilled mystic, who is able to steer to his desired state of consciousness, and whose sojourn in the supernal world is so familiar to him that he feels that it is his home to which he has returned. It should apparently be possible to suggest a similar relationship between “The Story of the Bread” and “The Guest Who Came In.” “The Guest Who Came In” would present a literary documentation of an early mystical experience of Rabbi Nachman, perhaps even among the first, one that occurred before he acquired self-confidence as a mystic, a mature adult and a tzaddik on the level of Moses. Conversely, “The Story of the Bread” documents Rabbi Nachman’s peak experience, when he was sure of his stance as the true tzaddik and as a mystic worthy of receiving the Torah as Moses had done on Mt. Sinai. But this interpretation is not feasible. Rabbi Nachman told “The Story of the Bread” “when he was living in Zlatipolia”–i.e., no later than 5562. And the occurrence may have been earlier, for it is possible that a period of time passed between before Rabbi Nachman shared it with his Hasidim. The story of “The Guest Who Came In” was experienced or told in 5569–at least seven years later, and less than two years before he passed away. How can this be understood? What occurred so that, seven years after Rabbi Nachman as a person tender in years received the Torah like Moses on Sinai, he told a story in which he appears as a beginning and hesitant mystic who is unfamiliar with the pathways of mysticism and fails to recognize basic kabbalist symbols such as vessels, tree and letter combinations? How could the person who, when tender in years, knew how to transform a heap of letters into letter combinations that form a clear Torah, a few years later not know the meaning of letter combinations? Logically, a person should develop from neophyte to master, from bewilderment to comprehension–not the other way around. In a conversation that I had with Rabbi Eliezer Berland, dean of Yeshiva Shuvu Banim, which touched upon “The Story of the Bread” and “The Guest Who Came In,” I raised this question. Rabbi Berland answered that Rabbi Nachman stated that “the ultimate knowledge is that we do not know” (Sichot Haran, 3), and that a person learns and understands until he reaches the ultimate level of his knowledge, which is that of not knowing. These are the states of knowledge that Rabbi Nachman spoke of–an echo of which may be heard from “The Story of the Bread” and “The Guest Who Came In.”

 The way of mysticism: from “The Story of the Bread” to “The Guest Who Came In” 

 133

That is to say, at the beginning of Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual journey, at the time that he was still tender in years, whenever he attained high spiritual levels everything appeared clear, comprehensible and conclusive; but after time passed, after he underwent more experiences and reached the ultimate knowledge, his attainments reached the level of “we do not know.” The hesitant stance in which a person does not know is more adult, mature and closer to ultimate knowledge, than the confident stance that knows everything. An inclusive and complete delineation of Rabbi Nachman’s visions and dreams and their development can be made only after a precise study of all of these with careful attention to their chronological sequence. I cannot complete such a study in this book,100 but I will make two observations. First, in Rabbi Nachman’s later dreams and visions, even those that he experienced in his final year, he describes states of hesitation and lack of knowledge, to the degree that he cannot read a Jewish text. These experiences are accompanied by a yearning to receive the approval and agreement of God and man.101 Second, Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual and mystical development over the years involved not only an intensification of his self-awareness as a tzaddik for the generations and as someone who is on the level of Moses-Messiah, but also elements of disappointment and retreat from the belief that he would succeed in actualizing these roles in his lifetime. His visions and dreams contain revelations of disappointment both regarding the conflict that erupted about him and regarding his Hasidim, who did not live up to his expectations. This disappointment led him to exchange his firm faith in his ability to fulfill his role as Moses-Messiah and as a giver of the Torah who paves a way for the redeemer who will come in his lifetime with a less acute faith, one that postpones messianic hopes to coming generations, and that envisions a long and wearisome process until the new road that he has paved will make possible the coming of the righteous redeemer. At this stage, Rabbi Nachman is aware that this process will come to pass only centuries after his death.102 100 For more on Rabbi Nachman’s visions, see above, Chapter 1; Mark, “MeiChezyon LeTorah”; ibid., “Hachavurah hamistit”; ibid., “Seridei eish.” 101 See for example Rabbi Nachman’s dream of 5570, in which others ostracize him and drive away his ancestors, his children, his Hasidim and representatives of the supernal world (Chayei Moharan [“Sipurim Chadashim,” 91 (11)], pp. 111–114). For more on this dream, see Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 55–56. In another dream that Rabbi Nachman had a year before he passed away, he agreed to offer himself as a sacrifice, but afterward retracted his commitment, and he wanted to flee and save himself (Chayei Moharan [ibid., 84 [4], p. 105). Regarding this dream and its meaning, see Weiss, “Kiddush Hashem umitat korban,” Mechkarim, pp. 172–178, and below, Chapter 8, Section 8. 102 Regarding this point, see Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 134–149.

134 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

Thus, the relationship between “The Story of the Bread” and “The Guest Who Came In” as a development from certainty to hesitation is part of a greater whole of various developments in Rabbi Nachman’s visions and dreams, and in his messianic self-awareness. The powerful blaze of Rabbi Nachman’s messianic hope changed over the years, but continued to burn throughout his lifetime. Rabbi Nachman’s self-concept as a mystic fared the same. Although he experienced periods of hesitation and bewilderment, his awareness of himself as a tzaddik who possesses powerful attainments that bestow outstanding spiritual abilities on him did not dissipate but accompanied him throughout his life. This view of Rabbi Nachman as one of the giants of Jewish mysticism throughout the generations–if not the greatest of them all–is one of the foundations of Bratslavian faith that sustains the fire that burns in Bratslav to this day.

 The way of mysticism: from “The Story of the Bread” to “The Guest Who Came In” 

Fig. 1a (upper right). Sha’arei Tzedek (Jerusalem 5749) Fig. 1b (lower right). Pardes Rimonim (Cracow 1592) Fig. 1c (left). Pardes Rimonim (Cracow 1592)

 135

136 

 The Stream of Mystical Consciousness

Fig. 2a (right). Pa’amon VeRimon (Amsterdam 1708) Fig 2b (left). Or Ne’erav (Vilna 1899)

 Part Two: Rectification

And I know and truly believe that our master, our teacher and our rabbi knows well, overall and in detail, everything that occurs with every soul in every generation–from the day that God created man upon the earth until now, and until the final end. And he knows all of the rectifications pertaining to each individual. And all of this knowledge is a small matter for him. The words of one who truly loves you forever, Natan of Bratslav1

Introduction: The Enterprise of Rectifications Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav’s diversified creative activity encompasses many fields: the homiletical discourses of Likutei Moharan; his short talks, advice and apothegms anthologized in Sichot Haran and dispersed throughout Chayei Moharan and Shivchei Haran. Parallel with his creativity in the discursive realm is his variegated creativity in the literary field. A principal set of stories is collected in Sipurei Ma’asiyot and another appears in Chayei Moharan under the title, “Sipurim Chadashim” (‘New Stories’), with additional stories appearing in Brats­ lavian texts published in later generations. Another important area of Rabbi Nachman’s creative endeavor was that of ritual rectifications. As part of his activities as a tzaddik, Rabbi Nachman innovated and established various rituals. Some of them he abrogated in his lifetime; others were intended to begin only after his death. Thus, for example, the ritual of confession before the tzaddik and the tzaddik’s assignment of fasts to individual Hasidim played an important role at the beginning of his tenure as a Hasidic tzaddik, but he later abolished them.2 Conversely, other rituals, some of which he established in his latter years, such as clapping during prayer, hitbodedut (spontaneous prayer), the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the rectification of pilgrimage to his gravesite, are rituals and rectifications that he established for generations, and they exist among his Hasidim to this day, serving as elemental components of the Bratslavian way of life. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the first signs appeared indicating that some of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications and recommendations had spread to and become accepted beyond the narrow circle of his Hasidim as part of a kabbalistic repertory of rectifications3 (although some of them also met with opposition). 1 Rabbi Natan of Nemirov, Alim LiTrufah (Jerusalem, 5741), p. 310. 2 See on this Rapoport-Albert, “Confession.” 3 One manifestation of the acceptance of the universal rectification beyond Bratslav circles at the beginning of the twentieth century is its inclusion in Sha’arei Tzion in editions printed in

140 

 Introduction: The Enterprise of Rectifications

Then, at the turn of the twenty-first century, a significant transformation took place, broadly expanding the perimeter of acceptance of Rabbi Nachman’s rituals to broad swathes of the Israeli public. I am speaking in particular of two rectifications: the recitation of ten particular chapters of psalms, which is imprecisely termed the universal rectification (hatikun haklali), and the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite in Uman, Ukraine. As will be shown further on, although a connection exists between these two rectifications, at their core they are disparate rectifications that were created at different times and intended for utterly dissimilar purposes. The rectifications that Rabbi Nachman established played an important role in his activity as an admor (Hasidic rebbe) and constituted an important component in the way of life that he fashioned for his followers during his lifetime and after his death. Rabbi Nachman took pride in these rectifications, viewing them as unique personal accomplishments without precedent from the day of Creation. Part Two: Rectification opens with Chapter 4, which is dedicated to describing the formative process of a number of Rabbi Nachman’s central rectifications: the rectification for a nocturnal emission, the universal rectification, and the rectification of pilgrimage to his gravesite in Uman. Clarification of the process of the formation of these rectifications leads to a greater understanding of their character and significance. This chapter also opens a discussion on Rabbi Nachman’s attitude to tests in the erotic realm. Chapter 5 resolves that discussion by concluding that Rabbi Nachman “desired tests.” Correspondingly, this chapter addresses the secret manuscript called The Booklet of Tests, whose subject matter is the tests that Rabbi Nachman underwent. Chapter 6 focuses on the secret “Story of the Armor,” which is related to the rectification for a nocturnal emission. The understanding of this text can contribute to a deeper and more precise appreciation of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications and their status in his eyes and in the eyes of his Hasidim. This chapter also investigates the possible link between Rabbi Nachman’s establishment of these rectifications and periods of especial messianic fervor in Bratslav Hasidism. Chapter 7 reveals the kabbalistic foundations of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, and in so doing helps explicate their messianic aspect. That chapter discusses the link between them and the episode of the sixth beggar–the beggar without hands–in “The Story of the Seven Beggars.” It describes the connection

Podgurze (a district of Cracow) 5660 (1900) and in Przemysl 5777 (1917); see Nabarro, Tikun, p. 144. Regarding the acceptance of the universal rectification in the books of the kabbalists of Jerusalem, see Meir, “Tikun HaBrit.”



Introduction: The Enterprise of Rectifications 

 141

between that episode and Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, messianic hope, and his unique place in the process of redemption. Chapter 8 discusses Rabbi Nachman’s decision toward the end of his life to move to Uman with the intention of being buried there. The chapter demonstrates that this decision was connected to Rabbi Nachman’s enterprise of rectifications, and that this move constituted part of his preparation for the rectification of pilgrimage to his gravesite that would begin after his death. Chapter 9, the final chapter, addresses modern developments in the rectifications–in particular, in the mass pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite on Rosh Hashanah with the rituals that have developed there in recent years. This chapter opens a doorway to understanding these new rituals and the relationship between them and Rabbi Nachman’s original rituals. The chapter concludes by pointing out the link between the messianic hope that characterizes the various factions of Bratslav Hasidism and the great flowering that Bratslav Hasidism has experienced in recent decades. The chapter also touches upon the revolution in the status of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav, who has been transformed from a persecuted figure embroiled in controversy to an Israeli cultural icon, the circle of whose admirers–who gain pleasure from his light and who delight in his teachings–grows increasingly wider.

Chapter Four The Formulation of the Universal Rectification, the Rectification for a Nocturnal Emission, and the Pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s Grave–and their Connection to Bratslavian Messianic Fervor 1 Introduction Academicians have extensively analyzed the meaning of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav’s universal rectification. One view attributes messianic meaning to the rectification, and another states that it was intended to redress the Sabbatian sin and succeed where the Sabbatians failed.1 However, careful study of the process of the formation of the universal rectification and of the rectification for a nocturnal emission demonstrates that some of these views and conjectures lack conceptual clarity, and as a result rely upon a mistaken chronology. That has resulted in an inexact explanation of the universal rectification, leading to its absolute identification with the rectification for a nocturnal emission.2 As will be demonstrated, the identification of these two rectifications with each other was influenced– among other factors–by the widespread Bratslavian conceptualization that terms the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms intended as a rectification for a nocturnal emission as the universal rectification. This chapter will attempt to conceptually and chronologically arrange the various rectifications, and in so doing clarify their character and the processes of their formulation in Rabbi Nachman’s lifetime. It will then examine whether

This chapter is based on “The process of the formulation of the universal rectification, the rectification for a nocturnal emission, and the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, and their connection to messianic fervor in Bratslav.” Daat 56 (summer 5765): pp. 101–133. [Hebrew] 1 Liebes, “Hatikun haklali”; Mondshine, “Al ‘Hatikun haklali’”; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 183, 207–208, 211–212. 2 For example, Liebes writes in his essay, “Hatikun haklali”: “The universal rectification is a ritual that Rabbi Nachman established, with whose help a person rectifies the sin of having spilled seed in vain. This ritual includes immersion in a mikveh and the recitation of ten particular chapters of psalms” (p. 253). As I will demonstrate, this description is inexact. All of the discussions about the universal rectification recorded in Likutei Moharan (I 28 and I 36) speak of a broad theoretical concept that does not include immersion in a mikveh and the recitation of psalms. Green too does not distinguish between the universal rectification and the rectification for a nocturnal emission; see Tormented Master, in the places noted in note 1 above.



The chronology 

 143

there is any connection between these rectifications and the intense messianic fervor that existed during a certain period of Bratslav Hasidism.

2 The chronology The first indication of Rabbi Nachman’s involvement with a universal rectification for sins–one that does not relate to individual sins but treats them as a whole–is in the discourse, “BeKarov Alai Merei’im” (Likutei Moharan I 36), which he apparently delivered in 5562.3 An additional introduction to the topic of the universal rectification appears in the discourse, “Hai Gavra D’Azeil” (Likutei Moharan I 20), which Rabbi Nachman delivered in 5566.4 In an altogether separate process, Rabbi Nachman developed the rectification for a nocturnal emission. In the summer of 5565, Rabbi Nachman revealed such a rectification to his Hasidim. The first component in this rectification is immersion in a mikveh, and the second is the recitation of ten chapters of psalms with a particular intent. The person should attempt to carry out this rectification 3 In Likutei Moharan HaMenukad (Jerusalem 5754), the index entitled “The Places and Times that the Teachings Were Delivered,” states that Likutei Moharan I 36 “was apparently delivered in 5562 (see Chayei Moharan, 410).” The same statement appears in other editions, such as that of Netzach Israel (Jerusalem, 5762). There, a note to this effect appears as well in the body of the text, at the beginning of the discourse. Chayei Moharan, 410, does not explicitly make such a statement regarding this discourse. However, it implies that discourses Likutei Moharan I 33, 35 and 38 were delivered at that period together with “many other teachings, which were delivered in those times.” And since it is known that Likutei Moharan I 38 was delivered on Shabbat Shirah of 5562 (Chayei Moharan [“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” 59 (59)], p. 68), one may conclude that discourses 33 and 35, as well as the “many other teachings,” were delivered in the vicinity of 5562. And since Likutei Moharan I 36 appears among these discourses, and since it presents “the language of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing)” as do the other discourses in this group, there is reason to presume that it too is related to the group of discourses delivered “in those times”–i.e., in 5562. This presumption of the Bratslav Hasidim is buttressed by an examination of the contents of the discourse, which presents an extreme espousal of the denial of the body, corresponding to a youthful Rabbi Nachman who was intensively engaged in self-mortifications in order to break his evil inclination. It thus corresponds less to an adult and mature Rabbi Nachman (see Green, Tormented Master, pp. 27–39). The analysis of the development of the universal rectification that will be presented further on will show a significant difference between the attitude expressed in Likutei Moharan I 36 and that expressed significantly later in Likutei Moharan I 29 (5566). This too leads to the conclusion that Likutei Moharan I 36 was delivered significantly earlier than was Likutei Moharan I 29. 4 This discourse was delivered on Shavuot, 5566. See Chayei Moharan (“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” 20 [20]), p. 26.

144 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

as soon as possible–certainly during “that same day.”5 Rabbi Nachman and original Bratslavian sources6 refer to this rectification as a “rectification for a nocturnal emission.”7 About five years after the establishment of the rectification for a nocturnal emission and about a half year before he died, Rabbi Nachman crafted a new ritual for his Hasidim, one intended to commence following his death. The essence of the ritual is a pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, with additional components of reciting ten chapters of psalms (the same psalms that he had earlier designated for the rectification for a nocturnal emission), and donating at least a minimal amount of money to charity. These must be accompanied by a person’s resolution never to return to his foolishness. Regarding this rectification of pilgrimage, Rabbi Nachman said that it can serve as a universal rectification that will redress all of a person’s sins.8 Scholars have not been sufficiently careful to distinguish between these three rectifications. For some, this is because they have adopted the harmonizing conceptualization found in later Bratslavian writings that views all of Rabbi Nachman’s discourses and statements as essentially one. This has precluded a proper

5

And then, at the time that [Rabbi Nachman] revealed the above-mentioned discourse [Likutei Moharan I 205], he at first said that the initial rectification consisting of [immersing in] the mikveh … on the same day…. If the person cannot immerse in the morning, he should at the very least immerse [later] that same day. Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 175–176 [Rabbi Nachman] cautioned his followers that should they experience an “unclean episode,” heaven forbid, they should immediately go to immerse in the mikveh. Sipurei Ma’asiyot (“Sichot She’Achar Sipurei HaMa’asiyot”), p. 8 And these ten chapters of psalms constitute a very, very great rectification for the above-mentioned [nocturnal emission]. And a person who merits to recite them on the same day [of the emission] no longer has any need to fear the terrible blemish of that episode, heaven forbid, for it was certainly rectified by this [recitation]. Likutei Moharan II 92

Then [Rabbi Nachman] said that whoever merits to do this–to recite these ten chapters of psalms mentioned above–on the same day that he experiences [the emission], heaven forbid, his sin will certainly be rectified and he should no longer worry at all. Sipurei Ma’asiyot (“Sichot She’Achar Sipurei HaMa’asiyot”), p. 8 6 I.e., the writings of Rabbi Natan and Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin. 7 Likutei Moharan I 205; ibid. II 92. The specific term used is mikreh lailah–‘an event of the night’–an expression used in the verse, “When there will be a man among you who is not pure because of an event of the night…” (Deuteronomy 23:11). 8 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 180. In that talk, Rabbi Nachman promised that when a person performs this rectification, Rabbi Nachman “will take him out of gehennom by the sidelocks, whatever level that person may be on” (Chayei Moharan [“Nesiyato VIshivato B’Umin,” 225 (41)], p. 288).



The universal rectification 

 145

description of the development of these rectifications, as well as of the changes that they underwent over the years. That has as a result interfered with a proper understanding of their nature and significance. Further on, I will look at the processes of change and formation of the various rectifications and delineate their discrete characters and intentions.

3 The universal rectification The discourse, “BeKarov Alai Merei’im”9 The term “universal rectification” appears for the first time in the discourse, “BeKarov Alai Merei’im,” delivered apparently in 5562.10 The universal rectification deals with the topic of sexuality. However, unlike the rectification for a nocturnal emission it does not relate to a particular sin but to “licentious desires,” a term referring to erotic desire in general.11 This discourse explains that sexual desire is “the universal desire,” and that “a person who breaks this desire can then easily break all desires.” Further on, this discourse describes a unique ritual intended to rectify licentious thoughts: Our Sages (may their memory be for a blessing) taught [the following] homily…. [“The verse, ‘And do not stray after your heart] and after your eyes’ (Numbers 15:39) is a reference to licentiousness.”12 …Therefore, when a person recites the first verse of the Shema, he must close his eyes tightly, corresponding to the “beautiful maiden who has no eyes.”13 [That is] because when lewd thoughts come to a person, the rectification is that he recite [the first verse of] Shema [(“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one”)] (and [then] Barukh shem [(the non-biblical verse, Barukh shem…–“Blessed be the name of His glorious sovereignty forever and ever”)].14

Licentious desires are aroused by the sight of the eyes. Therefore, shutting the eyes expresses their nullification. The first part of the paragraph above, “when a person recites the first verse of the Shema,” indicates that Rabbi Nachman is

9 Likutei Moharan I 36. 10 See above, note 5. 11 The Hebrew term niuf specifically means ‘adultery.’ In the writings of Rabbi Nachman and in other Hasidic texts, however, it is used as a synonym for sexual desire in general. 12 b. Berachot 12b. 13 Zohar, Part 2 (“Sabba Mishpatim”), p. 95a. 14 Likutei Moharan I 36:3.

146 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

speaking of the recitation of the Shema that occurs in the framework of the prayer service, and he is giving an additional meaning to the halachic practice of closing one’s eyes when reciting the first verse of the Shema.15 But the continuation of the passage shows that Rabbi Nachman views the practice of closing the eyes during the recitation of Shema as based on the concept that Shema and Barukh shem rectify lewd thoughts–and thus this recitation need not necessarily occur during the prayer service. Support for the idea that Rabbi Nachman is speaking of reciting Shema as a rectification and not only when it is part of the prayer service may be found in “the holy handwriting of our master, our teacher and our rabbi (may his memory be for a blessing), [Rabbi Nachman,] which records this discourse with a slight change of language.” That text states that “In order to nullify licentious thoughts, it is efficacious to recite Shema Yisrael and Barukh shem kavod, etc.”16 This phrasing leaves no doubt that Rabbi Nachman is advising a person to recite the Shema whenever he is struggling with licentious thoughts, without any connection to the obligation to recite the Shema in its set times and as part of the prayer service. It is therefore clear that in 5562, about two years before Rabbi Nachman first mentioned the rectification for a nocturnal emission by means of reciting ten chapters of psalms, he advised a ritual for rectifying and contending with licentious thoughts as part of the universal rectification: i.e., reciting Shema and Barukh shem with one’s eyes closed. Later on in this discourse, Rabbi Nachman explains that this ritual is helpful only in repelling occasional lewd thoughts. In graver instances, however, a person should add another component to the rectification: weeping and tears.17 15 As stated in the Shulchan Arukh: “The custom is for a person to put his hands over his face when reciting the first verse in order not to look at anything that might prevent him from concentrating” (“Orach Chaim” 61:5]). 16 The end of Likutei Moharan I 36. 17 The first source that I found that proposes tears as a rectification for a seminal emission and blemish of the covenant is Nachalat Yehoshua, by Rabbi Yehoshua Heschel Hacohen. This book is not currently available and might never have been published. However, it is quoted in Kav HaYashar by Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch Kaidonover: “Your newly-ripened produce offering and your agricultural offerings do not delay. The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me” (Exodus 22:28). One must say that, as Tosafot explain, the [Hebrew] term [for ‘your agricultural offerings,’ dimakha,] is [related to] dima’ot, ‘tears’…. Because [no more than] one out of a thousand [people] is saved from [committing] this sin of spilling seed in vain, the Torah comes to warn that a person should at least guard the first drop [and expend that in the proper way]…. And that is the secret meaning of the verse, “Streams of water descended from my eyes, for they did not guard Your Torah” (Psalms 119:136). [The verse] does not say “I did not guard,” but “they did not guard Your Torah.” That means that the eyes [(“they”)] shed tears



The universal rectification 

 147

And all of this [refers to a case in which] a person [indulges in] a mere passing thought. Then the recitation of these two verses suffices for him. But if, heaven forbid, he is accustomed to dwelling upon the universal desire, may the Compassionate One protect us, and he cannot tear himself away from it, then he must also shed tears when he accepts the sovereignty of heaven [i.e., while reciting the Shema].18

because they blemished [their] sight [by looking at what they should not have]. The eye sees and the heart desires, and the totality of your deeds, everything, is caused by the seeing of the eye that brings a man to [experience a] seminal emission. And tears comprise the rectification for a seminal emission. [That is] because the seed comes from the brain, and tears as well come from the brain. Therefore, a person must pray specifically with tears…. Thus, a person who blemished his covenant should make sure that he sheds tears when he prays. And then he subjugates the “plagues of human beings” (II Samuel 7:14). [This is] because the gates of tears are never sealed. Kav HaYashar, Part 2, Chapter 68, pp. 341–342 These words of Rabbi Yehoshua Heschel are quoted as well by Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye in his Toldot Ya’akov Yosef (“Parshat Nasso,” 3) , p. 445. An interesting echo of this teaching, which does not mention this source, may be found in a discourse by Rabbi Menachem Nachum of Chernobyl, who quotes an original explanation of his rabbi, the Maggid of Mezeritch, on why the Zohar states that a person who has spilled seed in vain cannot repent. And I heard from my teacher, [the Maggid of Mezeritch, a teaching regarding] the verse, “Your newly-ripened produce offering and your agricultural offerings do not delay. The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me” (Exodus 22:28) that [touches upon] the statement [of the Sages] (may their memory be for a blessing) in the Zohar (Part 1, [“VaYichi”], p. 219b), that, regarding the above-mentioned sin, a person cannot achieve repentance. The meaning is [as follows]. Repentance is a positive command of the Torah. Therefore, a person must perform it joyfully. But regarding the above-mentioned sin, a person cannot be joyful but must be depressed, and he must weep. And therefore he cannot attain repentance. Rather, supernal repentance must constrict itself [in order to come] to him. And that is [the meaning of] “your newly-ripened produce offering.” [The Hebrew for this term, melei’atekha, has the root meaning of malei, ‘full.’] This means that when you want to fill yourself–[i.e.,] make yourself whole–then “your agricultural offerings do not delay”–i.e., [do not delay your] tears. And then every “first-born of your sons you shall give to Me” (Exodus 22:28). Mei’or Einayim (“Parshat Ha’azinu”), p. 268 Rabbi Nachman’s explanation of the efficatiousness of tears as a rectification for the blemish of the covenant differs from that of Rabbi Yehoshua Heschel. Rabbi Nachman states that tears and licentious desire, which are under the influence of Lilith, come from the excess that gathers in the spleen, whereas Rabbi Yehoshua Heschel states that the brain produces the tears and the seed. Nevertheless, it is possible that Rabbi Nachman derived the basic idea that tears constitute a rectification for this sin from Rabbi Yehoshua Heschel’s words, as quoted in Kav HaYashar and early Hasidic texts. 18 Likutei Moharan I 36:4.

148 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

What is the meaning of this rectification, and what is the link between reciting Shema and the rectification of sexual desire?19 Rabbi Nachman elaborates that the root of lust is the turbidity of a person’s blood. The source of that turbidity is the spleen. The spleen is polluted by Lilith, which is the wicked sovereignty that competes with the sovereignty of heaven. The 12 words in the two verses that begin the recitation of the Shema, which express a person’s acceptance of the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, correspond to the 12 tribes of God, upon whom the sovereignty of heaven depends. Also, there are 49 letters in the names of the 12 tribes, identical to the number of letters in these two verses. Whereas the sovereignty of heaven is connected to the 12 tribes, the wicked sovereignty of Lilith is connected to the “mixed multitude” (Exodus 12:38). When a person accepts upon himself the yoke of the sovereignty of heaven as he recites these verses and fuses his soul into the 12 tribes of God, he disconnects himself from the wicked sovereignty and from the mixed multitude associated with it (the destructive forces created by sexual sins and, in particular, by spilling seed in vain), and joins himself to the sovereignty of heaven. When a person shuts his eyes tightly, he integrates himself into the level of the “beautiful maiden who has no eyes” mentioned in the Zohar, which is holy sovereignty, which has no eyes and no desires.20 Against this background, the function of the tears is clear. The tears come from the excess of the black bile.21 And black bile is [associated with] the spleen.22 [And the spleen] corresponds to the wicked sovereignty, the harlot, from which the souls of the mixed multitude come.

19 The Ari describes the bedtime Shema as a rectification for the spilling of seed in vain. The Ari is not speaking only about a nocturnal emission but also about the willful spilling of seed (Sha’ar HaKavanot [“Inyan Derushei HaLailah”], p. 366, and ibid., p. 370). Rabbi Nachman’s explanation linking the recitation of Shema to the spilling of seed in vain is different than that of Rabbi Chaim Vital. See Sha’ar HaKavanot (“Inyan Derushei HaLailah”), pp. 363–366, and ibid., p. 370; Sha’ar Ruach HaKodesh, Part 12 (Tikun 27), in particular pp. 62– 65. And see also Pri Eitz Chaim, Part 1, pp. 333–334. 20 This too has roots in the kabbalah of the Ari. Also, before you recite Shema Yisrael, close both of your eyes with your right hand, and have in mind what is written in Sabba Mishpatim: “a beautiful maiden who has no eyes.” And there we explained that this refers to Rachel, who now rises. Sha’ar HaKavanot (“Inyan Kavanot Keriat Shema”), p. 135 See as well Pri Eitz Chaim Part 2 (“Sha’ar Keriat Shema She’Al HaMitah”), 6, p. 168. 21 See Shevilei Emunah (Netiv 4), p. 37b. 22 Zohar, Part 3 (“Raya Mehemna, Parshat Pinchas”), p. 227b.



The universal rectification 

 149

And when a person sheds tears, then the excess–i.e., the licentious desires, which come from the turbidity of the blood of the spleen and the overflow–are pushed out and emerge outside. And [then] a person fuses his soul into the sovereignty of heaven. And thus [the Aramaic translation of] Jonathan translated the verse, “And they wept at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting” (Exodus 25:6), as “they wept and recited the Shema.”23 And they did so solely in order to be saved from thinking about the harlot, which is the husk that precedes the fruit, and in order to attain the revelation of the Torah.24

The tears are the means by which a person may save himself from the excess of the black bile that is connected to Lilith–an excess that, if it does not emerge as tears, is liable to emerge in licentious desires and lewdness that bring into being destructive forces: the souls of the mixed multitude. A person’s weeping and tears can therefore save him from such thoughts. They can help him break the husk that precedes the fruit and make possible the revelation of the Torah. Weeping and the recitation of the Shema take place at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting, for they constitute the way to enter into the Tent of Meeting, which is the place of revelation and Torah. Here, and throughout the discourse, Rabbi Nachman emphasizes that the central significance of the rectification is not that with it a person is saved from sin, but rather that it serves as a vital stage in the revelation of the Torah. Rabbi Nachman bases this view on two kabbalistic ideas. The first kabbalistic idea is that “the husk precedes the fruit.”25 Rabbi Nachman explains: “A person who wishes to eat the fruit must first break the husk. Therefore, before a person gains revelation, his soul must go into exile– i.e., into the traits [of the various aspects of evil], in order to break them and afterwards attain revelation.”26 This principle applies to the tzaddik who aspires to the revelation of the Torah. Two examples of such a tzaddik are Moses, who had to separate himself from his wife before receiving the Torah on Mt. Sinai, and Joseph, who “had to undergo a test that would purify [him] in [regard to] the 23 Weeping was the response of Moses and the congregation of Israel to the lewd behavior of Zimri, son of Salu, and Kozbi, daughter of Zur (Numbers 25). 24 Likutei Moharan I 26: 4. 25 This phrase appears many times in the kabbalah of the Ari. See, for example, Likutei Torah (“Parshat Bereishit,” s.v. vayomer Elohim yehi ohr), pp. 1–2; ibid. (“Parshat Lekh Lekhah,” s.v. bo na el shifchati), p. 51; ibid. (“Parshat VaYishlach,” s.v. sod v’eileh hamelakhim asher malkhu b’eretz Edom), pp. 98–99. Rabbi Moshe Cordovero commonly employs an alternative formulation: “the husk necessary for holiness”; see on this Sack, BeSha’arei HaKabbalah, pp. 83–102. 26 Likutei Moharan I 36:1.

150 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

universal desire…and as a result of passing the test and breaking the husk that preceded the fruit, he attained the fruit–i.e., the revelation of the Torah, which is wisdom and understanding, as in the verse, ‘There is no one as understanding and wise as you.’27”28 And this principle also applies to everyone who wishes to understand the words of the tzaddik, for “a person cannot attain and grasp the word of the tzaddik if he has not first properly rectified the sign of the holy covenant,”29 and “according to each person’s rectification is his attainment.”30 Being challenged by desires and overcoming them is thus a desideratum to attaining revelation and understanding, for a person can only gain the fruit after first encountering the husks that precede it. This observation apparently led Rabbi Nachman to the radical conclusion that a person must aspire to face tests and even initiate them, for until he comes in touch with the husks he cannot reach the fruit. In the coming chapter, which is dedicated to clarifying the character of the manuscript called “The Booklet of Tests,” I conclude that Rabbi Nachman was indeed interested in undergoing tests and did not avoid them, and I substantiate the claim that this approach of his was generally known and comprised one of the causes of the opposition to him. However, there is no evidence that he advised this as a general policy. Rather, this constituted his personal path. The second kabbalistic idea concerns the link between semen and the brain. According to the medical view common in the Middle Ages, a view that was assimilated into the Zohar and into kabbalistic and Hasidic literature, semen originates in the brain.31 Thus, influence flows from the brain to the “covenant.” Rabbi Nachman adds that influence can flow in the opposite direction as well: the state of a person’s covenant affects the functioning of his brain. To support this position, Rabbi Nachman quotes the Zohar, “Yesod [representing sexuality] rises to Abba and Ima [representing the brain].”32 Rabbi Nachman understands the Zohar to be stating that the covenant– yesod–is rectified when it ascends to Abba (‘father’) and Ima (‘mother’), the two halves of the mochin (‘brains’)–chokhmah (‘wisdom’) and binah (‘understanding’)–through which the Torah is revealed. The ascent of yesod implies the return

27 Genesis 41:39. 28 Likutei Moharan I 36:2. 29 Ibid., 5. 30 Ibid. 31 See regarding this Biale, Eros and the Jews, pp. 106, 266 note 22; Idel, The Mystical Experience, p.  191. On this conception in the writings of Rabbi Nachman, see Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” pp. 247, 236, note 51. Regarding additional ramifications that this physiological view had on Rabbi Nachman, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 66–85 (in the Hebrew edition only). 32 Likutei Moharan I 36:5.



The universal rectification 

 151

of the seminal drop to its root in the mochin–which essentially means the nullification of the drop.  This expresses Rabbi Nachman’s viewpoint, as presented in this discourse, that rectification of the sexual desire is identified not with its control and proper channeling but with its nullification. That is why, throughout this discourse, Rabbi Nachman describes the universal rectification in terms of breaking: “one must first break the husk…”33 “and it is the universal rectification–a person who breaks this desire can then easily break all desires.”34 In this spirit, Rabbi Nachman explains that since Moses is “the entirety of the revelation of the Torah,” he was called upon to separate himself “completely and entirely”35 and not satisfy himself with guarding the purity of the covenant. Joseph too “broke the husk” before he became “understanding and wise”–he not only ruled over it but he overcame it. The aggressive attitude toward desire reaches surprisingly scathing expression toward the end of the discourse when Rabbi Nachman entertains the notion of undergoing castration as a way of rectifying one’s consciousness: “The medical experts have written that castration is a treatment for madness. And that constitutes the elevation of yesod to Abba and Ima.”36 A few lines later, Rabbi Nachman identifies this idea with the universal rectification, writing that “the ascent of yesod–i.e., its rectification–reaches the mochin, which consists of Abba and Ima. And that is the universal rectification.”37 Although Rabbi Nachman is clearly not proposing literal physical castration– which is an explicit and well-known prohibition38–to effect the universal rectification and the breaking of sexual desire, his identification in principle between castration–which signifies the absolute nullification of sexual desire–and the universal rectification is pronounced and unambiguous.39

33 Ibid., 1. 34 Ibid., 2. 35 Ibid. 36 Ibid., 6. Regarding the medical sources regarding languishing and madness that inform Rabbi Nachman’s words, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 59–69 (in the Hebrew edition only). 37 Likutei Moharan I 36:6. 38 As Maimonides writes, “It is forbidden to destroy the reproductive organs of a male–whether of a human being or a domestic animal, wild animal or bird, whether unkosher or kosher…. And whoever castrates is lashed, according to Torah law” (Mishneh Torah [“Hilkhot Isurei Biah,” 16:10]). 39 On the self-image of kabbalists as eunuchs, see Wolfson, Language, Eros, Being, pp. 296–332; Abrams, HaGuf Ha’Elohi HaNashi, pp.  165–166. On various aspects of Rabbi Nachman’s view of the relationship between eros, castration and madness, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness,

152 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

This view of Rabbi Nachman may provide an additional explanation of why he “desired tests.”40 If a person’s goal is solely to overcome his evil inclination, then withstanding a test is a one-time event that does not assure success and protection against subsequent tests. But if person’s goal is to complete the process of breaking his evil inclination and castrating it, then with the attainment of this goal he will be no longer need to contend with that desire. All of this did not remain restricted to theoretical discussion. Rather, Rabbi Nachman testified that he succeeded in breaking and nullifying his sexual desire: And he boasted exceedingly of his great strength in breaking this desire. And he was exceedingly holy, great and awesome in this matter. And he said that he has no desire at all, and he said that for him male and female are equal–i.e., that he has no struggle because of any slightest passing thought when he sees or speaks with any woman, because everything is equal for him.41

One may assume that Rabbi Nachman reached this state prior to his delivering of the discourse, “BeKarov Alai Merei’im,” for he claimed that one of the innovations that made him unique was his success in breaking his desire when he was “tender in years.” I heard Rabbi Yudl (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing) say that he heard [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) boast that he is extraordinarily novel in regard to the breaking of desires: one cannot find that a person as tender in years as he is should so completely break all [of his] desires. [This is] because one can find a number of tzaddikim who left [their] desires behind, but they did not leave [them] entirely behind until they reached their old age. And he gave the example of a number of great tzaddikim, and he said that he knows that they did not leave [their] desires behind until they grew old. “But that a person tender in years such as myself, in the days of youth and childhood, should literally break all of [his] desires as much as I did–that is not at all to be found.”42

This therefore shows that the goal of the universal rectification is the absolute suppression of erotic desire, until one reaches a state that is the equivalent of castration. The ritual that Rabbi Nachman proposes in this discourse matches this approach well, for its goal is to bring a person to the state of “the beautiful

pp. 70–85 (in the Hebrew edition only. On Bratslavian commentary on circumcision as expressing an intent for self-mortification, see Wolfson, “The cut that binds.” 40 Shivchei Haran, 16, pp. 18–19. And see on this topic the following chapter. 41 Ibid. 42 Shivchei Haran, 171, p. 216. For more on the topic of self-mortification and the spiritual attainments that it makes possible, see above, Chapter 2.



The universal rectification 

 153

maiden who has no eyes”43; and since the eyes are the organs through which a person desires (“‘and after your eyes’ is a reference to licentiousness”44), entering into a state of the “beautiful maiden who has no eyes” is in a metaphorical sense an act of self-castration. Injury to the eyes as symbolizing a fatal blow against sexual desire may be found in the biblical episode of Samson. As the Mishnah states, “Samson went after his eyes; therefore, the Philistines plucked out his eyes.”45 But a closer analogue to the way in which Rabbi Nachman made use of this motif may be found in the story of Rabbi Matya ben Charash. The midrash tells that after Rabbi Matya ben Charash saw a beautiful woman, he grew so concerned that his evil inclination might overwhelm him that he drove a white-hot nail through his eyes. The angel Raphael was sent to heal him, but he refused treatment until God promised him, “I will be your guarantor … that the evil inclination will never again overwhelm you for the rest of your life.”46 Similarly, “injury” to the eyes in the ritual proposed in the framework of the universal rectification is intended not only to help a person overcome his evil inclination for the moment but to break the desire, to nullify and castrate it, so that he may feel assured that he will never again experience any struggle with that desire. The ritual of rectification proposed in “BeKarov Alai Merei’im” thus bears an extreme ascetic character not common in Jewish thought.47 Elliott Wolfson has dealt at length with the Zohar’s teaching that the phrase, “to the eunuchs who keep My Sabbaths” (Isaiah 56:4), alludes to kabbalists who only engage in marital relations on the Sabbath, otherwise separating themselves from their wives–thus “castrating” themselves–during the six weekdays.48 Although Wolfson bestows broad meaning to this image, seeing in it an important key to understanding the Zohar’s relationship to sexuality as including components of asceticism,49 the use that the Zohar makes of the image of “castration” is 43 Likutei Moharan I 36:3. 44 Ibid., 2. 45 m. Sotah 1:8. Rabbi Nachman writes in another discourse: “The essence of lust is dependent upon the eyes. As [the Sages] said, ‘Samson went after his eyes’ (Sotah 9b). And as the verse states, ‘And do not stray after your heart and after your eyes’ (Numbers 15:39)” (Likutei Moharan I 7:4). 46 Midrash Tanchuma HaMenukad (“Addition to Parshat Chukat based on a second manuscript from Oxford”), Part 2, p. 138. Regarding this story and its metamorphoses, see Lipsker, “Matya Ben Charash,” pp. 345–363. 47 See Biale, Eros and the Jews: ibid., “Hateshukah lesagfanut,” pp. 213–224. 48 Wolfson, Language, Eros, Being, pp. 318–322. 49 For a view that categorically denies the characterization of kabbalistic systems as tending toward asceticism, see Idel, Kabbalah and Eros, in particular pp. 223–232. Idel even notes that “[o]nly the Hasidic master Rabbi Nachman of Bratzlav contributed a more fundamentally nega-

154 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

mild compared to the way in which Rabbi Nachman uses it. Whereas in the Zohar “castration” represents a temporary abstention from intimate relations that does not include the Sabbath, for Rabbi Nachman “castration” expresses absolute nullification of the sexual inclination, so that a person will never again experience the sexual urge.50 The tearful weeping that accentuates the ritual crafted by Rabbi Nachman thus matches precisely the symbolic self-harm and ascetic character of the universal rectification.

“Hai Gavra D’Azeil” About three years after Rabbi Nachman first brought up the topic of the universal rectification, he addressed it again in a discourse that he delivered on Shavuot of 5566.51 The discourse, which was published as “Hai Gavra D’Azeil”–Likutei Moharan I 29–is long and contains many elements. In this discourse as well, the universal rectification relates to the erotic realm– to rectifying the “covenant.” However, here Rabbi Nachman states that not only the erotic realm but every area of life has its own universal rectification: “And the principle in all things is that a person must rectify every element by means of the universal rectification that is relevant to it.”52 In this discourse, Rabbi Nachman cites two examples of universal rectifications that pertain to particular realms (although Rabbi Nachman views damage in those realms as linked to the blemish of the covenant and the rectification of those realms as linked to the rectification of the covenant).

tive attitude toward sexuality than that of Luria and his school,” but he does not elaborate (ibid., pp. 231–232). 50 Unlike Wolfson, Daniel Abrams sees the Zohar’s characterization of kabbalists as “eunuchs” not as an expression of a kabbalistic ideal for attaining asceticism or castration but, to the contrary, as a response to the fear of castration (Abrams, HaGuf Ha’Elohi HaNashi, pp.  165–166). Indeed, throughout Abrams’ book, he repeatedly describes castration not as a goal of the kabbalists but as a source of menace and fear (ibid., pp. 12, 13, 14, 38, 57, 76, 94, 96, 129). This of course stands in absolute contrast to Rabbi Nachman’s use of the image of castration as a welcome, yearned-for result of the universal rectification. 51 Chayei Moharan (“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” 20 [20]), p. 26. 52 Kitzur Likutei Moharan I 29:14. The Kitzur Likutei Moharan (‘Abridged Likutei Moharan’), containing brief summaries of the discourses in Likutei Moharan, was composed by Rabbi Natan of Nemirov under the direction of Rabbi Nachman, who saw and approved at least a part of the book (regarding this work, see Naveh Tzaddikim, pp. 134–135). For the sake of brevity and due to its felicitous expression, I quote here from this work instead of from Likutei Moharan itself.



The universal rectification 

 155

The first rectification is in the area of speech: “[A person’s] rectification of [his] speech, which results in its being heeded and accepted, comes about as a result of the praise that he bestows upon the true tzaddikim. And that [praise] constitutes the universal rectification for speech.”53 When a person praises the true tzaddikim, he invests his speech with a higher level of consciousness. And he “establishes and elevates [his] consciousness in consequence of praising the tzaddikim. When a person praises and glorifies the tzaddikim, [his] consciousness is elevated.”54 Then he rectifies his speech and it is heeded and accepted. This model exists not only for people, but for angels as well: “When [the angels] want to make speech that will be heeded and accepted among them … they first praise and glorify the Lord, be He blessed, Who is the Tzaddik of the world.”55 The second rectification is in the area of business, and helps a person avoid thievery. “And this is the essential rectification regarding business: that a person should intend with [his] every step and with [his] every word as he is going about and speaking while [he is engaged in] business, that his motivation in making a profit is to give charity. And this is the level of the universal rectification of the money…. A ‘gift’ is the level of the universal rectification, which is charity.”56 “And similarly, every entity must be rectified by means of the universal rectification relevant to it. For instance, business [must be rectified] by means of [giving] charity.”57 Rabbi Nachman states that the necessity for a universal rectification is due to the difficulty in rectifying every sin on an individual basis: “In regard to rectifying every individual sin, they are very numerous, and it is difficult, even impossible, for a person to rectify them, because there are many minutia and details [implicit] in every single prohibition.”58 The solution that Rabbi Nachman proposes is that a person not deal with his every individual act of wrongdoing but instead direct his efforts to a general repentance and rectification of his mind and awareness, and that rectification and elevation will rectify all of his deeds59: And the principle is that a person must first engage in the universal rectification. And in this way he automatically rectifies everything in detail.

53 Kitzur Likutei Moharan I 29:1. 54 Ibid., 2. 55 Ibid. 56 Ibid., 9. 57 Ibid., 10. 58 Ibid., 29:5. 59 This approach to rectification and repentance was developed by Rabbi Abraham Isaac Hacohen Kook in the framework of what he termed “universal repentance” (see Orot HaTeshuvah, pp. 13–17). I hope to expand on this matter elsewhere.

156 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

And although the universal rectification is higher and more elevated than the rectification of every element in detail, nevertheless, since the rectification of every element is dependent upon the brain–i.e., on drawing the whiteness from the brain (corresponding to “flowing from Lebanon” [Song of Songs 4:15])–and [since] elevating the brain is only possible by means of the universal rectification…, therefore, a person must at first go to the level higher than this [particular issue]–i.e., [to] the universal rectification–in order to rectify and elevate [his] brain. And in that way, everything is automatically rectified.60

Based on this approach, Rabbi Nachman states that the person who aspires to rectify his speech is not required to pore over the wrongdoings and errors that he committed in his speech. Instead, he should attain the universal rectification of speech by engaging in praise of the tzaddikim, which can elevate his spirit and raise his mind, and that automatically elevates his words. Similarly, the universal rectification of business does not require a person to pore over errors that he committed in the course of his business affairs. Rather, it addresses the degree of his focus on being charitable. And having charitable intention in itself raises and rectifies a person’s everyday business conduct, for when a person’s sole purpose is to give, he will be careful not to take anything that is not his.

White garments61 In this teaching, “Hai Gavra D’Azeil,” Rabbi Nachman explains the universal rectifications pertaining to speech and business. But he does not here explicate what, practically speaking, a person should do to implement a universal rectification to purify the covenant. However, in this discourse Rabbi Nachman brings up a way of conduct that is new and interesting, and that possesses something of an expression of a universal rectification that applies to all areas. And that is the wearing of white garments. White garments constitute the rectification of speech…. “At every time your garments should be white” (Ecclesiastes 9:8)…. That is [a reference to] the level on which the Shekhinah is purified from her menstrual state. [This] corresponds to “[the menstrual] blood [of a woman who has given birth] is stirred and transformed into milk.”62

60 Likutei Moharan I 29:10. 61 For messianically-informed explanations of the wearing of white garments, see Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 60, 68–71; Green, Tormented Master, p. 210, and p. 219, note 54. 62 b. Bekhorot 6b; b. Nidah 9a.



The universal rectification 

 157

As a result of their sins, wicked people separate the Holy One, blessed be He, from His Shekhinah, for they cause [the Shekhinah to experience] the [flow of] blood of menstruation. And then [the Shekhinah] is called “city of blood.”63 And that is why the wicked are called “men of blood” (Psalms 25:54). [This is] because the 365 [biblical] prohibitions depend upon the 365 sinews, [through which] the blood circulates…. Therefore, a person must “sweeten” this blood–i.e., [he must] rectify [his having violated] the prohibitions, which are [related to] the sinews, [through which the blood flows,] and draw whiteness to them. This corresponds to [the statement that] “blood is stirred and transformed into milk.” And that is [as well the meaning of the verse,] “At every time your garments should be white.” [The Hebrew word for ‘your garments,’ begadekhah, can be read as] begidekhah, [meaning ‘in your sinews’]: precisely so–to draw whiteness into them.64

The white garments are connected to and even identified with the universal rectification of speech. But they are also connected to and dependent upon the universal rectification of the covenant: As a result of a person’s rectification of [his] covenant, which [includes] the totality of [his] sinews, all of the prohibitions that he has transgressed are automatically rectified, and whiteness is drawn to them. And because of this, the totality of the sinews, that being the holy covenant, is called Shadai [‘Almighty’–because the Aramaic word for ‘shoots’ is shadi, similar to Shadai]–in that it shoots and discharges the whiteness and rectifications like an arrow to every single detail in accordance with its need…. [This] corresponds to [the verse,] “At every time your garments should be white.” [This is] because all of the whiteness is drawn from the brain. [That] corresponds to [the idea that] “‘flowing from the Lebanon’ [indicates flowing] from the white of the brain.”65 And [so] by means of the rectification of all the sinews, the brain is elevated.66 But as long as the universal rectification has not been rectified and the Shekhinah [remains] on the level of “Why is Your clothing red?” (Isaiah 63:2), [which] corresponds to the blood of menstruation, [then] speech is [unrectified, and thus] forbidden.67

This view is based on the same physiological model that is adopted in “BeKarov Alai Merei’im.” The source of the drop of seed is in the brain. That drop passes 63 Ezekiel 24:6; Nahum 3:1. 64 Likutei Moharan I 29:3. 65 Zohar, Part 3 (“Parshat Pinchas”), p. 235b. 66 Likutei Moharan I 29:4. 67 Ibid., 6.

158 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

through the entire body until it emerges from the place of the covenant. The rectification of the covenant constitutes the rectification of the entire body, including the brain. Rabbi Nachman argues for the existence of a similar structure in regard to charity. Thus, he links the universal rectification of business (which is giving charity) to the topic of white garments: A person who does not perform business faithfully but is immersed in the desire for money and robs his fellow man arouses the blood (as mentioned above). That corresponds to “Why is Your clothing red?”…. And that is [why the word “blood” here, in these verses, is in the plural–literally,] “bloods–[that is because the Hebrew word dam has] a double meaning,”68 [in that it can mean both “blood” and “money”]–i.e., the blood of menstruation [is brought about] by means of the [misuse of] money…. And [intending to earn money for the sake of giving charity] corresponds to the universal rectification [relating to] the blood. [That is] because charity corresponds to the totality of [a person’s] sinews–corresponding to “Sow [the seed of] charity for yourselves” (Hosea 10:12) [and] corresponding to “coriander seed” (Exodus 16:31), which is the white drop.69 [That means] that by means of this rectification [a person’s] brain is elevated [to be] on the level of “brain white as silver”70…. [The fact that business is referred to as “give and take” comes] to teach that it possesses [the quality of] a rectification for that which corresponds to the garments mentioned above– [which is to say,] for that which corresponds to blood, as mentioned above.71

Thus, giving charity elevates a person’s mind and brain and rectifies the blood and whitens it to be like seed. In this way, it transforms the red garment into white garments. A white garment indicates a state of purity and rectification, of elevation of the brain, of the universal rectification, which begins in the mind, from which it extends to all of a person’s limbs and states of being. The white garments of which Rabbi Nachman speaks in this discourse are not solely a literary and homiletic motif. Rather, they allude to an actual ritualistic garment that Rabbi Nachman began to wear at the time that he delivered this discourse. Rabbi Natan testifies that “[Rabbi Nachman] delivered the discourse ‘Hai Man [Gavra] D’Azeil LeMinsav Iteta’ (in [Likutei Moharan I] 29) on Shavuot 5566, when, for the first time, he wore white garments. And then [he] incorpo68 b. Megillah 14b. 69 “‘And the manna like coriander seed’ [Exodus 16:13]. What is coriander seed? … A white drop” (Tikunei Zohar [Tikun 21], p. 54a). 70 Tikunei Zohar Im Targum, p. 677. 71 Likutei Moharan I 29:9



The universal rectification 

 159

rated [a discussion of] the level of white garments into [his] discourse.”72 It is therefore clear that Rabbi Nachman’s discourse on white garments accompanied his inaugurating the practice of wearing white garments, and that this discourse was intended, among other things, to explain his practice. Unlike Rabbi Nachman’s directive to praise the tzaddikim or give charity, which are addressed to all of his Hasidim, his discussion about wearing white clothes should not be seen as an implicit call for his Hasidim to adopt his new practice of wearing white as part of the universal rectification. The white garment appears to be appropriate only for the tzaddik and spiritually accomplished person73 who has attained the universal rectification of speech, the universal rectification of business and the universal rectification of the purity of the covenant. Wearing white garments implies a certain presumption that is unfitting for an ordinary Hasid. “A person must guard [his] garments exceedingly well, so as not to disrespect [his] garments. Rather, [he should] guard them properly, so that they will not sustain any stain or spot…. Therefore, a Torah sage who has a spot upon his garments is deserving of death … because the garments themselves judge him….”74 There is danger in daring to wear white garments, because if a person does not realize his presumption but stains himself, his garments themselves will judge him. As far as is known, wearing white clothes, whether on the Sabbath or on weekdays, was never a custom among Bratslav Hasidim–neither in Rabbi Nachman’s lifetime nor afterwards.75

The character of the universal rectification in the discourse, “Hai Gavra D’Azeil” Four years after Rabbi Nachman proposed a universal rectification with a harsh ascetic character (Likutei Moharan I 36 [“BeKarov Alai M’rei’im”], 5662), he again raised the topic of the universal rectification (Likutei Moharan I 29 [“Hai Gavra D’Azeil”], 5666). But this second iteration of the universal rectification bears an absolutely different character than the first. This second iteration too relates in essence to the rectification of the covenant and relies upon the view that the rectification of the covenant is a universal rectification whose influence reaches 72 Chayei Moharan (“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” 20 [20]), p. 26. 73 The custom of wearing white on the Sabbath and festivals existed among the kabbalists, and for a certain period of time among Hasidim as well. Regarding this custom and its meaning, see Wertheim, Law and Custom in Hasidism, pp. 217–218; Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, p. 68; Kimelman, LeKhah Dodi, pp. 142–180; Hallamish, Shabbat, pp. 154–158; Sagiv, “Chasidut Chernobyl,” p. 97. 74 Likutei Moharan I 29:3. 75 This does not include Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, on which it has been the custom from earliest generations to wear white (Shulchan Arukh [Orach Chaim 2:4]).

160 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

far beyond the erotic realm: the rectification reaches the brain and envelops the entire person. However, Rabbi Nachman’s approach to how a person attains the universal rectification and the nature of that rectification has undergone a radical change– perhaps even a revolution. Rabbi Nachman does not reprise the ritual of accepting the yoke of the kingdom of heaven with tightly shut eyes and tearful weeping. This new, long and detailed discourse contains no description of an act of universal rectification that involves “breaking” and “nullification,” and there are no images such as castration and gouging out the eyes. The universal rectification proposed by Rabbi Nachman in 5566 bears an absolutely different character. Rabbi Nachman calls upon a person to focus on supernal levels and turn to matters that will elevate his mind and brain, so that in consequence his conduct in all of its details will of itself rise and be rectified. In the realm of speech, the praise of tzaddikim constitutes focusing on an exemplar of holiness and purity. It is not involved in eliminating the evil but in turning one’s gaze toward the good. Engaging in matters that are high and holy elevates a person’s mind, including all of the words that flow from it. In the realm of business, Rabbi Nachman calls upon a person to live with a general goal of giving and being charitable. When a person lives with this as his overall focus, the details of his business will be rectified, and he will not be susceptible to acting dishonestly. Wearing white garments also expresses a person’s turn to purity and holiness, to cleanliness of mind and spiritual exactitude. Wearing a white, festive garment shows that the person relates to himself with respect and relegates royal nobility to himself–a status that obligates him to act properly and avoid the slightest stain. In this context, Rabbi Nachman explains the words of Rabbi Yochanan: “He called his garments ‘my glory,’76 which corresponds to sovereignty–the level of ‘the King of glory.’”77 Wearing white garments stands in direct contrast to nullifying one’s desires by wearing sackcloth and ashes and engaging in self-mortifications that damage one’s body and dignity. A person who is so meticulous about his honor and dignity that he will not allow his garment to be stained represents the complete opposite of the figurative summons for a person to gouge out his eyes and castrate himself–actions that maim and destroy the image of man. Rabbi Natan composed a long prayer dedicated to the topic of the universal rectification, which details the various types of universal rectification. He concludes:

76 b. Shabbat 114a. 77 Psalms 24:7; Likutei Moharan I 29:3.



The rectification for a nocturnal emission 

 161

Have mercy and be gracious to us, and fulfill our requests with compassion. And help us soon attain the universal rectification in full, on every level: the rectification of the covenant, which [affects] the totality of the sinews [and] which is the universal rectification of all 365 Torah prohibitions; the universal rectification of speech, by means of praising tzaddikim; the universal rectification of business, by means of [giving] charity; [and] the rectification of garments. Help us attain all of these in Your vast compassion, quickly, easily [and] speedily, for You know that we cannot rectify every single item in detail, for there are so many, because we have created so very many blemishes. Have compassion on us and save us quickly for the sake of Your name, and give us the merit in Your great compassion and mighty kindness to truly [attain] universal rectification and completeness on every level…. Blessed are You, Who hears prayer.78

4 The rectification for a nocturnal emission An explicit prohibition against spilling seed in vain does not appear in Scripture. Nevertheless, the Talmud and midrashim describe this as one of the most severe transgressions. The Talmudic sages find scriptural support for this prohibition in the story of Er and Onan: “When [Onan] came to the wife of his [dead] brother, [Er], he wasted [his seed] on the ground so as not to give seed to his brother. What he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He killed him as well.”79 Although the evil of Onan’s deed may appear to be his unwillingness to provide offspring on behalf of his brother, the Talmud states that the essence of his sin inhered in the destruction of his seed. Thus, “Rabbi Yochanan said: Whoever spills seed in vain is deserving of death, for the verse states, ‘What he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He killed him as well.’80”81 It is possible that the biblical laws of impurity also served to shape the Talmud’s portentous attitude toward spilling seed in vain. The Torah’s designation of menstrual blood and semen as impure may be understood as expressing the view that death constitutes the paradigm of impurity. Since blood and semen represent a frustrated potential for life, they possesses the quality of death, and can even spread that quality in the form of impurity. This view apparently informs the Talmudic concept that spilling seed in vain is tantamount to bloodshed and murder. The seed is the source and beginning of 78 Likutei Tefillot, Part 1, 29, p. 446. 79 Genesis 38:9–10. 80 Ibid. 81 b. Nidah 13a.

162 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

life. When propagated appropriately, it develops into a baby. And so a person who destroys his seed “is considered as though he spills blood. As the verse states, … ‘Those who slaughter the children in the valleys, under the clefts of the rocks.’82 Do not read ‘slaughter’ [shochatei] but ‘squeeze’ [sochatei–i.e., masturbate].”83 And “Rabbi Elazar said: What is [the meaning of] the verse, ‘Your hands are filled with blood’ (Isaiah 1:15)? [That refers to] those who masturbate with [their] hand.”84 The Talmudic sages’ grave attitude to spilling seed in vain is also expressed in their interpretation of the verse about the generation of the Flood, “For all flesh destroyed its way upon the earth.”85 They explain that the sin of that generation was the willful destruction of seed. That interpretation informs the Talmud’s statement that if a person does not carefully guard himself against spilling seed in vain, it is “considered as though he brings the Flood into the world.”86 This exigent attitude comes to expression in Rabbi Yosef Caro’s decisive halachic ruling in the Shulchan Arukh: “Spilling seed in vain is forbidden, and this sin is graver than any other sin in the Torah.”87 The kabbalistic literature accentuates the gravity of the prohibition, and imbues it with demonic and cosmic properties. The husk, Lilith, and other demonesses take hold of these seminal drops and use them to create demons and destructive entities called “plagues of human beings” (Samuel II 7:14), which accompany the sinner throughout his life and afterward.88 The negative ramifications of his sin extend far beyond his individual self, for with this deed he bestows his might upon the powers of the Sitra Achra (‘Other Side’–i.e., the side of evil), and he prevents the Shekhinah from strengthening her power and spreading her

82 Isaiah 57:5. 83 Nidah op. cit. 84 Ibid. 85 Genesis 6:12. 86 “Rabbi Eliezer says: Whoever holds [his] member when he urinates is considered as though he brings the Flood to the world” (b. Shabbat 41a, and also Nidah 13a). Rashi there explains: “[This is] because he inflames himself until he comes to [experience a] seminal emission. And that was the nature of the damage that the generation of the Flood caused, in that it spilled seed in vain. As the verse states, ‘For all flesh destroyed,’ etc.” See as well the commentary of Rabbei­ nu Bachaye on Genesis 28:10. Regarding the Talmud’s view on the spilling of seed in vain, see Satlow, “Wasted seed.” 87 Shulchan Arukh (“Even Ha’Ezer,” 23:1). 88 See on this Scholem, Pirkei Yesod, pp. 148–152. And see Sichot Haran, 141, p. 178. This kabbalistic perspective is a development and expansion of demonic descriptions that exist in the midrash; see Bereishit Rabbah (Mirkin) 20:11. A fascinating literary realization of this viewpoint is found in Agnon’s story, “Sipur atzuv meiravakah zekeinah,” pp. 210–215.



The rectification for a nocturnal emission 

 163

presence–which would have occurred with the birth of a human being, that being an “image of God” entering into the world.89 The prohibition against spilling seed in vain is apparently just one component of a cluster of elements that together comprise the guarding of the covenant, maintaining sexual purity and holiness. And in comparison to prohibitions expressly stated in the Torah–such as those forbidding incest and adultery–it would seem to be of negligible importance. However, the Zohar presents this sin as being graver than all other sexual offenses and even worse than murder, as in the following passage. We have learned: Whoever spills his seed in vain is called evil, and he does not see the countenance of the Shekhinah…. And such a person is punished90 in this world more than anyone else…. And if you will say: What about other wicked people who have killed people? Come and see: All of them will rise [from gehennom91], but he will not rise. Why? [It is because] they killed unrelated people, but he killed his children, literally. He spilled much blood92…. We learned: Rabbi Yehudah said that every sin in the world is susceptible of gaining repentance–except for this one. And every sinful person will eventually see the countenance of the Shekhinah– except for this person.93 94

Many kabbalists adopted this grave attitude toward spilling seed in vain, and these passages from the Zohar are quoted repeatedly in the kabbalistic ethical

89 See Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 253. 90 Perhaps this should be translated as “driven out of.” 91 See Zohar, Part 2, (“Pinchas”), p. 214b. 92 Elsewhere as well the Zohar describes the spilling of seed in vain as murder. See Zohar, Part 2, (“VaYikra”), p. 3b. 93 Zohar, Part 1 (“VaYichi”), p. 219b. 94 Translation based on Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh, Volume 3, pp. 148–149. And also: There is no sin that is [as] difficult before the Holy One, blessed be He, as that of a person who is false and blemishes this sign of holy being. And that person does not see the countenance of the Shekhinah. Regarding this sin, the verse states, “And Er, the first-born of Judah, was evil in the eyes of the Lord” (Genesis 38:8). And a verse states, “Evil will not dwell with You” (Psalms 5:5).” Zohar, Part 2, (“[Pinchas”), p. 214b (translation based on Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh, Volume 6, p. 193)

164 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

literature.95 However, its conclusion that, in contrast to all other wrongdoings, repentance and rectifications can have no effect on this transgression disturbed them. And so various kabbalists rejected this conclusion in different ways–in particular, by quoting other sources and other versions of the Zohar, leading to the verdict that “with great repentance”96 it is possible to rectify this sin.97 Rabbi Nachman comments on this passage and on the efficacy of repentance, as follows. As to the statement written in the holy Zohar that regarding the blemish of the covenant– in particular, “spilling one’s seed in vain,” heaven forbid, etc.–repentance has no effect, [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) said that this is not the case. Rather, repentance is effective for every [sin]. And he said that no one understands the straightforward meaning of this statement of the Zohar except for him. And the principle is that in truth repentance certainly is effective in regard to this transgression, even if a person had sinned a great deal, heaven forbid. And it has already been explained in published texts that the essence of repentance is [that a person resolves] not to commit [the sin] from now on, and he must pass through those places and areas where he had been at first [and where he had sinned,] and be tested there.98 And when, this time, he has compassion on himself and no longer does what he had done before but breaks his desire, that is the essence of repentance.99

95 For an anthology of much kabbalistic material on the gravity of this sin and its ramifications, see Rabbi Aharon Roth’s Taharat HaKodesh, Part 1 (“Ma’amar Pegam HaYesod”), pp. 85b–108b. 96 Zohar, Part 1 (“Parshat Noach”), p. 62a. 97 See Reishit Chokhmah HaShaleim, Part 2 (“Sha’ar HaKedushah”), Chapter 17, pp.  499–569; Shenei Luchot HaBrit (“Sha’ar Ha’Otiot”), pp. 70a–72a. Rabbi Aharon Roth quotes these words of the Zohar but rejects them on the basis of other passages in the Zohar, writing: “And in this you may see clear proof that repentance is effective [to heal] every blemish, as all of the early and later tzaddikim concur.” Later on he adds, “and so have all of the kabbalists agreed” (Taharat HaKodesh, Part 1 [“Ma’amar Pegam HaYesod”], pp. 99a–100a). Regarding various recensions of the Zohar on this matter, see Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 443, note 108; Mondshine, “Al ‘Hatikun haklali,’” pp. 200–201 and ibid., note 10. 98 As Maimonides writes: “What is complete repentance? A person has the opportunity to repeat a sin that he had committed, but he refrains from doing so, and not out of fear or lack of ability. For instance, a man had sinful relations with a woman. Then, after some time passed, he was alone with her and experienced the same passion and possessed the same physical ability and he was in the same place as before, but this time he refrained and did not transgress. He is considered to be a complete penitent” (Mishneh Torah [“Hilkhot Teshuvah,” 2:1]). And see also Zohar, Part 1, (“Breishit”), pp. 19b, 54a. 99 Sichot Haran, 71, p. 87.



The rectification for a nocturnal emission 

 165

Rabbi Nachman’s decisive response that “this is not the case” implies that he disagrees with this passage from the Zohar. However, his subsequent statement that only he understands the meaning of this passage indicates that he did not think that this passage meant what it seemed to say. Alternatively, it is possible that Rabbi Nachman disagreed with this passage and purposely spoke unclearly in order to blur that disagreement.100 This description by Rabbi Nachman of repentance is of a piece with a depiction from Likutei Moharan: And know that the essence of complete repentance [is achieved] when a person goes through those places literally where he had been before [his] repentance–everyone according to what he previously underwent. And when he literally passes through those places and situations that he had been in initially, but he now turns his back on them and controls his [evil] inclination so as no longer to do what he had [earlier] done, that is the essence of complete repentance. And only this is considered repentance.101

It is possible that the emphatic statement, “And only this is considered repentance,” addresses the schools that propose fasting and self-mortification as part of the rectification of repentance, and comes to establish that only what he here describes constitutes the essence of repentance.102 Rabbi Nachman’s assertion that repentance for the blemish of the covenant is essentially no different from repentance for any other sin is implied in another teaching from Likutei Moharan. And how does [a person] extract and bring forth sparks of holiness that had fallen because of the blemish of the covenant?

100 Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav implied more than once that he was at least the equal of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. For instance, in one of his talks with his Hasidim, Rabbi Nachman expressed the longing for a group like that of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, and he added that if there were such a group, he would probably be its leader. (This section was censored from Chayei Moharan and published in Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan; see Yemei HaTla’ot, p. 195.) Taking this into account, it is possible that Rabbi Nachman allowed himself to disagree with the words of the Zohar. In Liebes’ view, Rabbi Nachman saw himself as greater even than Moses; see Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” pp. 243–248. Regarding the comparison to Moses, see above, Chapter 2 (“The Story of the Bread”). 101 Likutei Moharan II 49. The date on which this discourse was delivered is unknown. 102 However, this explanation raises a difficulty, since at this period (5566–5568) Rabbi Nachman was dispensing personal rectifications to his Hasidim, which essentially consisted of instructing them to fast on certain days. See regarding this Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 60, 62; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 207–208.

166 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

And [the sage] told them: “With that which entered”–with that spirit that entered into a person. That is [to say], with the fact that a spirit of foolishness–meaning, thoughts of lewdness–had entered him, and he breaks his desire, with that he extracts and brings out sparks of holiness of the blemish of the covenant. [This is] because that corresponds to the level of repentance [balanced] on the scales.103

In the case of the blemish of the covenant, repentance involves a person withstanding a test and overcoming his desire. As a result of that, he raises the sparks that had previously fallen when he had blemished his covenant. Rabbi Nachman adds that “this corresponds to the level of repentance [balanced] on the scales.” The original concept of “repentance balanced on the scales” is that for every sin that a person has committed he must mortify himself in a measure parallel to and of equal weight with the enjoyment he had derived from the sin. With these mortifications, he absolves himself of the punishment that he should otherwise have incurred.104 Rabbi Nachman here provides a new interpretation of the concept of repentance balanced on the scales, removed from its initial import. According to Rabbi Nachman’s explanation, repentance balanced on the scales relates to the intensity of the test: a person must withstand enticement of equal intensity to that which he experienced at the time that he failed and sinned.105 Rabbi Nachman’s claim that repentance for spilling seed in vain and blemishing the covenant is qualitatively no different than repentance for other sins begs the question: What is the function and relevance of a rectification for a nocturnal emission? If a person who has failed in this area must repent just as he is required to do for other sins, what need is there for a special rectification? The answer to this question is quite straightforward: the rectification for a nocturnal emission is intended neither for a person who purposefully spills his seed in vain nor for a person who experiences an emission with no culpability whatsoever. Rather, it is intended for a person who experiences an emission due to his having indulged in lascivious thoughts. There is a person who experiences [a nocturnal emission] because he ate or drank a good deal, or because he is weak and weary, or because he did not lie down in a proper [position].

103 Likutei Moharan I 27:8. The date upon which this discourse was delivered is unknown. 104 Regarding repentance balanced on the scales as practiced by Chasidei Ashkenaz, see Dan, Al HaKedushah, pp. 406–411; and ibid. Note 16 there lists additional sources. 105 Rabbi Natan apparently had these discourses in mind when he stated that the process of repentance and its possibility even in regard to a nocturnal emission “has already been explained in published texts.” See Sichot Haran, 70, p. 47.



The rectification for a nocturnal emission 

 167

And all [such cases are] nothing. ([Such a case] is comparable to a child urinating in [his] sleep.)… But if someone experiences [a nocturnal emission] due to [his sexual] thoughts, heaven forbid, that literally creates husks, heaven forbid, as is explained in [the kabbalistic] literature. However, [if in such a case] a person will recite these ten chapters of psalms on the same day, he will certainly rectify this [matter] very thoroughly.106

In the standard model of repentance, a person “must pass through those places and areas where he had been at first [and where he had sinned,] and be tested there. And when, this time, he has compassion on himself and no longer does what he had done before but breaks his desire, that is the essence of repentance.”107 This standard model is not apropos regarding teshuvah for a nocturnal emission, for in the latter case, the entirety of the person’s sin inheres in his thoughts and fantasies, not in an act that he engaged in. Therefore, a return “to those places and matters” is a return to his failure–i.e., his fantasies–whose result (the emission) was not due to his action. Accordingly, the rectification for a nocturnal emission must be different from and even the opposite of the standard model of repentance (which is suitable for other sexual wrongdoings, including the purposeful spilling of seed in vain). A rectification for sexual thoughts cannot be a reconstruction of those thoughts. To the contrary, it must be a dissociation from them. This is indicated in the following passage. [Rabbi Nachman] strongly urged that a person should not fear [a nocturnal emission] at all, because fear, worries and depression regarding this matter are exceedingly harmful. In particular, [a person has no reason to fear] now that [Rabbi Nachman] revealed these ten chapters of psalms that are capable of rectifying this sin…. And in essence [Rabbi Nachman’s] intent was [to teach] that a person must not allow such matters to make him afraid and fearful, and he should not [indulge in] any [worried] thoughts regarding this matter. Instead, he should be like a mighty warrior and stand firm against his desire and remove his mind from this matter entirely, and not fear at all. And the Lord will do that which is good in His eyes with him–whatever He, blessed be He, desires.108

106 Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 177–178. 107 Sichot Haran, 71, p. 87. 108 Sipurei Ma’asiyot (“Sichot She’Achar Sipurei HaMa’asiyot”), p. 8.

168 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

The formation of the rectification for a nocturnal emission The rectification for a nocturnal emission took shape in stages. In 5565, Rabbi Nachman began to speak of the rectification for a nocturnal emission and to explain its meaning.109 He stated the need to recite ten psalms, but did not identify any particular psalms. “[Rabbi Nachman] said that it would be proper to reveal the ten chapters of psalms that a person must recite, but whichever ten chapters of psalms a person recites constitute a rectification for this.”110 Five years later, in 5570, Rabbi Nachman told his Hasidim what the ten specific psalms are.111 Despite the great importance that Rabbi Nachman attributed to the rectification for a nocturnal emission, only two short discourses in Likutei Moharan relate directly to that rectification.112 Rabbi Nachman’s first words about this rectification, which he spoke after Shavuot of 5665, appear in Likutei Moharan I 205.113 Rabbi Natan was not present when Rabbi Nachman delivered this discourse, and he wrote down “a little of the discourse … according to [his] understanding”–referring to Rabbi Yitzhak, Rabbi Nachman’s young son-in-law, who was

109 In Likutei Moharan I 205. 110 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 175. 111 One year earlier, in 5569, Rabbi Nachman delivered the discourse, Likutei Moharan II 92, which continues the earlier discussion from 5565 regarding the “rectification for a nocturnal emission.” In this discourse, Rabbi Nachman discussed phrases in the book of Psalms that allude to the ten types of melody. Although Rabbi Nachman acknowledged that he possessed a list of the ten psalms to be recited, he did not wish to reveal it at that time. Afterwards, on Shabbat Shekalim of 5570, Rabbi Nachman revealed the specific psalms that are to be recited as part of the universal rectification. A detailed description may be found in Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 176–177. In the timeline published in Chayei Moharan, which was apparently written by Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin (“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” 59, p. 71), the text states that “the revelation of the ten chapters of psalms occurred in the year 5569.” If this means that Rabbi Nachman then revealed the particular psalms to be recited, that is not in accord with Rabbi Natan’s detailed and clear description in Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 174–181. Therefore, the date of 5569 is to be rejected. See also Through Fire and Water, Part 3, Chapter 19, pp. 171–173; P’ulat HaTzaddik (Jerusalem), 890–897, pp. 584–590 and note 400. Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin himself raised doubts about the exact order of events. See on this Parpar’ot LeChokhmah, Part 1, 92, pp. 60a–61a; Naveh Tzaddikim, pp. 66–67; Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 443, note 106. 112 Likutei Moharan I 205; ibid. II 92. 113 “At that time, he began to reveal the wondrous and tremendous secret of the ten chapters of psalms that [a person] should recite on the day that he experiences a nocturnal emission, heaven forbid” (Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 9, p. 15).



The rectification for a nocturnal emission 

 169

then only 15 years old,114 and Rabbi Natan later on heard only a brief explanation directly from Rabbi Nachman. It is possible that this fact influenced the succinct style of this discourse.115 The second discourse that discusses a rectification for a nocturnal emission is found in Likutei Moharan II 92. Since later on in this chapter I will refer to many details from these two discourses and they are not lengthy, I will now quote them in full.

Likutei Moharan I 205 A rectification for a nocturnal emission (may the Compassionate One protect us) is for a person to recite ten chapters of psalms on the same day that he experienced [the emission], heaven forbid. [This is] because reciting psalms possesses the power of bringing the [seminal] drop forth from the husk that grasped it. [That is] because the numerical value of [the Hebrew word for ‘psalms,’] tehillim, is [equal to the numerical value of the name] Lilith together with the five letters of her name.116 [And Lilith] is in charge of [inducing a nocturnal emission], as is well-known.117 And as a person recites the psalms, he must have in mind that the numerical value of [the word] tehillim (‘psalms’) is 485, which is precisely the numerical value of the two [Divine] names, El Elohim, when [they are spelled out in] full, like this: Alef Lamed; Alef Lamed Hei Yud Mem. [This indicates] that by means of these two [Divine] names the drop [is able to] emerge from the husk. [This is] because the drop is on the level of [the two sefirot of] chesed [‘kindness’] and gevurah [‘might’] (as is well-known118). [That is] because [the drop] possesses the properties of fire and water, warmth and moisture, which correspond to chesed and gevurah.

114 Yemei Moharanat states explicitly that Rabbi Natan first heard this discourse from Rabbi Yitzchak, Rabbi Nachman’s son-in-law (the husband of his daughter Sarah). However, in Through Fire and Water, Rabbi Chaim Menachem Kramer claims that it is more reasonable to assume that Rabbi Natan heard it from Rabbi Yuska, Rabbi Nachman’s other son-in-law (who married his daughter Adel), who was three years older than Rabbi Yitzchak. Regarding the computation of these ages and regarding this matter overall, see Through Fire and Water, pp. 598, note 6. 115 Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 9, p. 15. 116 That is to say, in addition to the numerical value of the letters that constitute the name Lilith (480), one adds the number five for the five letters of that name, to attain 485. 117 Regarding the place of Lilith in this context, see note 87 above. And see also, e.g., Zohar, Part 1, (“Breishit”), p. 19b. 118 Eitz Chaim describes the path that the drop travels during unification as the path that unites chesed and gevurah:

170 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

And by means of the two names El Elohim (as [mentioned] above), which correspond to chesed and gevurah (as is well-known119), which have the numerical value of [the word] tehillim (as [mentioned] above), the drop is brought forth from there. And [so] a person must have this in mind when he recites the psalms. And a person must recite ten chapters. [That is] because there are ten types of melody. These correspond to the ten expressions in which the book of Psalms is spoken, as [the Sages] teach in the Talmud (Pesachim 117a) and in the Zohar.120 These [expressions] are ashrei [(‘fortunate’)] and lamenatze’ach [(‘for the conductor’)] and maskil [(‘giving wisdom’)] and halleluyah [(‘praise God’)], etc. See Rashi’s commentary. And each one of the ten expressions (as [mentioned] above) has the power to nullify the power of the above-mentioned husk. [That is] because each one of these expressions is the opposite of the above-mentioned husk. [This is] because, [for instance, the term] ashrei [(‘fortunate’)] is [also] an expression of ‘seeing’ and looking. [As such, it is] the opposite of the above-mentioned husk, the essence of whose power comes from damage to sight, corresponding to [the verse], “And his eyes grew dimmed from seeing” [Genesis 27:1), [and] corresponding to “Let there be luminaries” [Genesis 1:14]), [in which the Hebrew word for ‘luminaries,’ m’orot, is spelled with a letter vav] missing, [so that it may be read as ma’arat, ‘a curse’]. And our Sages (may their memory be for a blessing) interpreted [this] homiletically as referring to Lilith.121 Thus, [Lilith’s]

And then yesod of Abba is clothed in yesod of Ima, where chesed and gevurah are mixed together (as is known). That is why yesod is called ‘west’ (ma’arav), for it is a ‘mixture’ (eiruv) of chesed and gevurah together” Etz Chaim, Part 1, Gate 11 (“Heikhal Nekudim: Sha’ar HaMelakhim”), 4, p. 150) 119 See, for example, Sha’arei Orah, Part 1, Gate 5 (“HaSefirah HaShishit”), p. 179. 120 The Talmud states: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The book of Psalms was said with ten statements of praise: with nitzuach [(‘conducting’)], with nigun [(‘melody’)], with maskil [(‘giving wisdom’)], with mizmor [(‘tune’)], with shir [(‘song’)], with ashrei [(‘fortunate’)], with tehillah [(‘praise’)], with tefillah [(‘prayer’)], with hoda’ah [(‘thanksgiving’), and] with halleluyah [(‘praise God’)]. The greatest of all of them is halleluyah, which incorporates together the name [of the Lord] and praise [of the Lord]. b. Pesachim 117a And the Zohar states: We have learned that the book of Psalms is said [alternatively: is established] with ten types of song: with nitzuach [(‘conducting’)], with nigun [(‘melody’)], with maskil [(‘giving wisdom’)], with mikhtam [(‘golden song’)], with mizmor [(‘tune’)], with shir [(‘song’)], with ashrei [(‘fortunate’)], with tefillah [(‘prayer’)], with hoda’ah [(‘thanksgiving’), and] with halleluyah [(‘praise God’)]. And the highest of all of them is halleluyah. Zohar, Part 3, (“Mishpatim”), p. 101a 121 Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 44), p. 79b.



The rectification for a nocturnal emission 

 171

essential power comes from damaged sight. And ashrei [(‘fortunate’)], which is an expression of sight,122 is [Lilith’s] opposite. And maskil [(‘giving wisdom’)] too [can be interpreted similarly. This is] because [Lilith] corresponds to ‘causing bereavement’–[in Hebrew,] meshakel. And [the word] maskil [(which is spelled almost the same)] is the opposite of that. And see elsewhere regarding this matter.123 [That is] because the essence of [Lilith’s] power is [the ability] to cause a person to sin with a nocturnal emission, heaven forbid. That comes about by means of the language of Targum [Aramaic interpretive translation], which corresponds to [the Sages’ statement that] “[Every psalm entitled] ‘maskil’ was delivered via the medium of an interpreter-translator.”124 [Targum, translation from the Holy Tongue–in particular, into Aramaic–] mixes good and evil, [so that] at times [the energy is] meshakel and at [other] times [it is] maskil. See there.125 And halleluyah [(‘praise God’)] too [can be interpreted similarly. It] is the opposite of the husk whose name is Lilith, [so-called because she wails with constant wailing [(yelalah)]. And praise is the opposite of wailing, for the letters of [the word] halleli [(‘praise’)] are the opposite of [the letters of the word yelalah [(‘wail’)]. And [Rabbi Nachman] did not [explicate or] explain the remainder [of the expressions]. Also, the drop [of semen] comes from the ‘mind’ [da’at],126 which corresponds to chesed and gevurah (as is known). [This is] because the drop [of semen] corresponds to chesed and gevurah (as [mentioned] above). And it is known that the mind [da’at] corresponds to five chasadim [plural of chesed] and five gevurot [plural of gevurah], which together are ten.127 Therefore a person needs to recite ten chapters. And that corresponds to [the verse,] “To David, a maskil. Fortunate is the person whose sin is forgiven.”128 The acronym [of this phrase is] na’af [‘licentiously desired’], which is subjugated

122 Possibly Rabbi Nachman was assuming a link between the words ashrei and shur, which means ‘sight,’ as in the verse, “For from the mountain tops I see [this nation], and ‘gaze’–shor–at it from the heights” (Numbers 23:9). 123 Likutei Moharan I 19. 124 The continuation of the passage in Pesachim (117a) that categorizes the ten expressions of psalms explains the meaning of the different introductory phrases to chapters of psalms. In this context, it states that regarding psalms that begin with the phrase “A maskil of David” or “To David, a maskil,” David recited the psalm to an intermediary, who repeated it (according to Rashbam) or explained it (according to Rashi) to the people. 125 In Likutei Moharan I 19, delivered on Shavuot 5664, Rabbi Nachman develops this theme, and describes Targum as a removal from the source, a mixing together of the Holy Tongue and mundane language, good and evil. And this mixture makes sin possible. 126 According to the medical outlook common in kabbalistic literature and accepted by Rabbi Nachman, the source of the seminal drop is in the brain, from which it descends until it comes to the place of the covenant. Regarding this, see Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 436 note 51; Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 72–73 and the notes there (in the Hebrew edition only). 127 See, for instance, Sha’ar HaKavanot (“Inyan Pesach: Derush 1”), p. 139. 128 Psalms 32:1.

172 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

by means of the level [represented by the phrase,] “To David, a maskil”–i.e., [an eponymous reference to] psalms.129

Rabbi Nachman begins by explaining the inherent connection linking the recitation of psalms with the rectification for a nocturnal emission, and afterwards he discloses why a person should recite specifically ten psalms. Rabbi Nachman cites two rationales linking psalms with the rectification for a nocturnal emission. First, one sort of damage that results from a nocturnal emission is that the husk called Lilith takes the seminal drop and uses it to create “plagues of human beings” (Samuel II 7:14). The book of Psalms possesses a power that opposes Lilith. This correlation is expressed in the fact that the Hebrew for ‘psalms,’ tehillim, has a numerical value equal to the name Lilith (the numerical value of the letters of Lilith plus five for the five letters in the name). Therefore, when a person recites psalms he can extract the seminal drop from Lilith. Second, the numerical value of the word tehillim is equal to that of the Divine names El Elohim when they are spelled out. These names correspond to the values of chesed and gevurah. And since the seminal drop combines the properties of chesed and gevurah, when a person recites psalms, that has the power to liberate the drop from Lilith, who had seized it. Now Rabbi Nachman supplies two explanations (related to his above exposition on the link between psalms and the rectification for a nocturnal emission) for why a person should recite precisely ten psalms. First, psalms may be divided into ten categories of expressions of song, each of which is the opposite of the husk and thus has the power to nullify the husk. Rabbi Nachman buttresses this by providing three examples from among these ten categories, showing how in each case the name of that category linguistically correlates to the husk called Lilith and expresses a meaning opposing Lilith and its properties. Second, the seminal drop comes from the mind (da’at). Since the mind incorporates within itself five chasadim and five gevurot, these properties inhere as well in the drop.  Therefore, in order to liberate the drop, a person must recite precisely ten psalms, which correspond to the five chasadim and the five gevurot (totaling ten) within the drop. Rabbi Nachman concludes the discourse with an additional allusion to the special ability of psalms to rectify the blemish of the covenant.

129 The division of paragraphs was arranged by me with the goal of assisting the reader’s comprehension.



The rectification for a nocturnal emission 

 173

Following this discourse, the psalms that are to be recited as the rectification are listed. This list and the associated material are not part of Likutei Moharan I 205. Rabbi Nachman provided this list only four or five years after he delivered this discourse. Rather, the list was attached to Likutei Moharan I 205 by the publishers, for the convenience of the reader.130 This list of psalms is also placed at the end of Likutei Moharan II 92, which will now be discussed.

Likutei Moharan II 92 As in the previous discourse, the division of sections is mine. A rectification for a nocturnal emission, heaven forbid, is to recite ten chapters of psalms, as was explained in Volume 1.131 See the matter there. [This is] because ten chapters of psalms correspond to the ten types of melody of which the book of Psalms [is composed]. These are: berakhah [(‘blessing’)], ashrei [(‘fortunate’)], maskil [(‘giving wisdom’)], etc. [This rectifies a nocturnal emission] because the ten types of melody (as [mentioned] above) have the power to nullify the above-mentioned power of the husks and blemish, for [the psalms] are the inverse of the above-mentioned husk and blemish (as is explained there in Volume 1). And know that these ten types of melody (as [mentioned] above) correlate to the blemishes mentioned above. That is alluded to in [the titles of the types of melody, and their appearance–either direct or implied–in ten] verses. [The titles and appearance in these verses are listed below.] [1.] Berakhah [(‘blessing’)]. “I will bless the Lord, Who advised me; even at night…” (Psalms 16:7). [2.] Ashrei [(‘fortunate’)]. “Fortunate is the person whose sin is forgiven, whose transgression is covered” (Psalms 32:1). [3.] Maskil [(‘giving wisdom’)]. “And from the Lord is a wise woman” (Proverbs 19:14).

130 The first edition of Likutei Moharan I was published in 5568 (Ostroh), whereas Rabbi Nachman only revealed the list of psalms in 5570 (as described in Sichot Haran, 141, p. 177). Thus, the list of psalms does not appear in the first edition. Only beginning with the second edition (Ostroh 5581) was it added, and at the end of Likutei Moharan I 205. 131 In Likutei Moharan I 205.

174 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

[4.] Shir [(‘song’)]. “At night, may His resting-place be with me” (Psalms 42:9). [The Hebrew word for ‘His resting-place,’ shiro, may be translated as ‘His song.’] [5.] Nitzuach [(‘conductor’)]. “For the conductor: ‘Do not destroy’” (Psalms 59:1). [6.] Nigun [(‘melody’)]. “I recall my melody at night” (Psalms 77:7). [7.] Tefillah [(‘prayer’)]. “Can bland food be eaten without salt?” (Job 6:6). [The Hebrew word for ‘bland food,’ tefeil, is similar to tefillah, ‘prayer.’] [8.] Hodu [(‘thanksgiving’)]. “[Distance your way from her…] lest you give your splendor to others” (Proverbs 5:9). [The Hebrew word for ‘your splendor,’ hodekhah, is similar to hodu, ‘give thanks.’] [9.] Mizmor [(‘tune’)]. “He Who delivers destruction at night” (Job 35:10). [The Hebrew word for ‘destruction,’ zemirot, can also be translated as ‘tunes.’] [10.] Halleluyah [(‘praise God’)]. “A woman who fears the Lord is to be praised” (Proverbs 31:30). And understand these allusions well. And know that a person must recite [the following] ten chapters on the same day that he experienced an unclean incident, heaven forbid: “A golden song of David” (16), “Of David, an enlightening song” (32), “Fortunate is the person who treats the poor with wisdom” (41), “Like a deer that longs” (42), “For the conductor: ‘Do not destroy’” (59), “For the conductor, on the yedutun” (77), “A prayer of Moses” (90), “Give thanks to the Lord, call out His name” (105), “Upon the rivers of Babylon” (137), “Everyone, praise God!” (150). And these ten chapters of psalms constitute an exceedingly great rectification for the matter mentioned above. And a person who merits to recite them on the same day has no need for any more fear whatsoever from the terrible blemish of the incident, heaven forbid, for it was certainly rectified by this. And in the merit of the rectification of this sin, may our righteous messiah come to gather our scattered ones. As the verse states, “The Lord builds Jerusalem, He brings in the farflung of Israel.”132 May it come quickly in our days, amen.133 132 Psalms 147:2. 133 This discourse concludes the book of Likutei Moharan. The fervent last paragraph marks the end of the entire book in keeping with the widespread custom of concluding a holy text with a prayer for “the coming of the righteous redeemer, quickly, in our days, amen.”



The rectification for a nocturnal emission 

 175

Likutei Moharan II 92 is a combination of two discourses that Rabbi Nachman delivered at different times. The first part, which concludes with the words, “And understand these allusions well,” was told by Rabbi Nachman to Rabbi Natan and other Hasidim in 5569, about four years after Rabbi Nachman delivered the discourse, Likutei Moharan I 205.134 The second part, which includes the list of psalms that are to be recited in the rectification, was delivered at a later date. On the Sabbath of Parshat Shekalim 5570, Rabbi Natan chanced upon the list of psalms in Rabbi Nachman’s handwriting but, despite his effort to memorize it, he did not succeed in doing so. Rabbi Natan asked Rabbi Nachman to reveal the list to him, but Rabbi Nachman refused to do so. A few weeks later, after Purim of that year, Rabbi Nachman transmitted this list to Rabbi Aharon of Bratslav and Rabbit Naftali of Nemirov, and asked them to disseminate it.135 Likutei Moharan I 205 gave a detailed description of how three of the ten expressions of melody, of which Psalms consists, express the rectification of the dynamic of Lilith (these three expressions being ashrei [(‘fortunate’)], maskil [(‘giving wisdom’)] and halleluyah [(‘praise God’)]). In the first part of Likutei Moharan II 92, Rabbi Nachman quotes verses relating to all ten expressions of melody, verses that do not necessarily come from 134 Rabbi Natan describes the scene as follows. Afterwards, after almost four years had passed (and tens of thousands of sheets of paper would not suffice [to describe] what occurred in those years, during which time [Rabbi Nachman] had already contracted his illness from which he [eventually] passed away), [Rabbi Nachman] had already returned to Lemberg. Once during the winter, he was lying on his bed and we were standing before him, when he began to speak about the ten chapters of psalms that are a rectification for that which was mentioned above. And then he directed me to write down on a sheet [of paper] the verses that allude to the ten types of melody, which are the rectification for that which was mentioned above. And I sat down to write. And from his mouth he called to me and revealed to me the verses. And I wrote them, just as they have been published (in Likutei Moharan II 92, as [mentioned] above). And then he divulged that it was his desire to reveal in detail the ten chapters of psalms that a person must say on the same day. And we stood and waited for him to reveal [them] to us, but we did not merit [to receive them]. Sichot Haran, 141, p. 176 And see as well Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 9, p. 15. 135 See Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 177–180. No explanation is given for why Rabbi Nachman chose these particular psalms. In contrast to what one would have expected, they do not make mention of all ten expressions of melody. Traditional Bratslav literature discusses the question of the connection of each of these psalms to the rectification, finding in each one allusions to the sin or to its rectification. Some of these appear forced and tangential, but Rabbi Nachman himself did not refrain from homiletics of a similar nature (see Parpar’ot LeChokhmah, Part 1, 92, pp. 60a–61a).

176 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

Psalms. In these verses, he finds allusions to (a) woman (in maskil [“giving wisdom’], halleluyah [‘praise God’] and hodu [‘thanksgiving’]136), (b) night (in berakhah [‘blessing’], shir [‘song’], nigun [‘melody’] and mizmor [‘tune’]), (c) destruction (in lamenatze’ach [‘for the conductor’]), (d) dreams (in tefillah137 [‘a prayer’]), and (e) some other way of alluding to the blemish of the covenant (in ashrei138 [‘fortunate’]).139

5 The universal rectification and the rectification for a nocturnal emission The above survey has shown that Rabbi Nachman’s discourses that discuss a rectification for a nocturnal emission (i.e., the recitation of ten psalms) do not even allude to the universal rectification. And his discourses that discuss the universal rectification do not even allude to reciting ten psalms or to rectifying a nocturnal emission. In fact, at this stage not only is there no link between these two rectifications, but they are separated by a certain tension and the fact that they seek opposing goals. The rectification for a nocturnal emission is intended to redress a defined and particular blemish caused by the spilling of seed during sleep. To this end, Rabbi Nachman teaches certain intentions (kavanot) that “a person must have in mind while reciting the psalms” in order to attain the specific goal of rectifying that nocturnal emission by extracting the seminal drop from the husk.140 This

136 The verse in which the source verse (Proverbs 5:9) appears cautions against failure in the erotic realm, warning a man against succumbing to the wiles of the strange woman and urging him instead to rejoice in the wife of his youth. 137 The verse, “Can bland food be eaten without salt?” continues, “Is there taste in the saliva [that comes as a result] of strong-tasting foods?” (Job 6:6). The Hebrew word for ‘strong-tasting foods,’ chalmut, can be read as chalamot, ‘dreams.’ As Rashi in his comment on this verse states, “Some interpret this as meaning ‘a dream.’” And elsewhere Rashi interprets the word for “saliva” as alluding to a seminal discharge (Rashi on Leviticus 15:3). Thus, this verse from Job may be interpreted as alluding to “semen that comes in consequence of dreams.” 138 In Likutei Moharan I 205, Rabbi Nachman homiletically interpreted the verse, “Fortunate is the person whose sin is forgiven” (Psalms 32:1) by noting that it forms the acronym, na’af (‘licentiously desired’). 139 For more on the kabbalistic sources of the rectification, see Chapter 7. 140 Likutei Moharan I 205.



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave 

 177

rectification comprises a local and immediate response to a specific event, and so it is important to recite it “the same day that he experienced [the emission].”141 The universal rectification, on the other hand, inherently and by definition does not serve to rectify a particular sin but is based on the concept that “universal rectification is higher and more elevated than the rectification of any particular element.”142 The universal rectification does not deny a person’s ability to rectify specific damage and sins. However, Rabbi Nachman advises that a person not devote himself to a Sisyphean struggle to rectify his every individual sin. Instead, he “must at first go to the level higher than this [particular issue]–i.e., [to] the universal rectification.” Congruent with the goals of these two rectifications, Rabbi Nachman chose various customs and rituals to rectify each. The customs of these two rectifications are not of a piece, but in two separate categories: particular and universal.143

6 The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, and new objectives in reciting the ten psalms In 5570, about a half year before he passed away, Rabbi Nachman told Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon, “I am taking you as witnesses. Know that these ten chapters of psalms are very, very useful in rectifying a seminal emission. And they are a complete rectification and very, very helpful.”144 Later in that talk, Rabbi Nachman designated the two men to witness something else: a new ritual that included the recitation of those ten psalms. The episode is recounted in Sichot Haran. He also designated them as witnesses and said that when his days are completed, after he passes away, if a person comes to his grave and there recites these ten chapters of psalms (as mentioned above) and gives a small coin to charity, then even if his sins and wrongdoings have grown and become very, very strong, heaven forbid, “then I will exert myself and extend myself to the length and breadth to save him and rectify him,” etc.145

In Chayei Moharan, Rabbi Natan describes the same incident. 141 Ibid. And also “that a person must recite [the following] ten chapters on the same day that he experienced an unclean episode” (Likutei Moharan II 92). 142 Likutei Moharan I 29:10. 143 The discourse, “Hai Gavra D’Azeil” (Likutei Moharan I 29), which discusses the universal rectification, was delivered in 5566, after Rabbi Nachman had, in 5665, revealed the recitation of ten psalms as a rectification for a nocturnal emission (Likutei Moharan I 205). 144 Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 177–178. 145 Ibid., p. 179.

178 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

[Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) promised during his lifetime, designating two kosher witness to [certify] it, that after he passes away, when anyone will come to his grave and donate a small coin to charity and recite those ten chapters of psalms that are listed by us as a rectification for a nocturnal emission (may the Compassionate One protect us), then [Rabbi Nachman] will stretch himself to the length and to the breadth, and he will certainly save that man. And he said that he will bring him out of gehennom by the sidelocks, even if that person has become whatever he has become, even if he transgressed whatever he transgressed, as long as from now on he makes a commitment not to return to his foolishness, heaven forbid.146

In preparation for the period after his death, Rabbi Nachman established a new ritual that has no direct bearing on a nocturnal emission, the blemish of the covenant. This ritual makes it possible for a person to receive a rectification from Rabbi Nachman even after the latter has left this world. Aside from the recitation of psalms, the components that comprise the rectification for a nocturnal emission play no role in this new ritual. The immersion in a mikveh, the particular intentions that “a person must have in mind while reciting the psalms” in order to extract the seminal drop from the husk, and the need to engage in the rectification “that same day” are not relevant. Conversely, new components appear that shape the particular character of this new ritual and express its nature. The first component, which both practically and conceptually constitutes the core of the new ritual rectification, is of course the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave. The second component is the donation of a small coin to charity. The function of the mitzvah of giving charity in this context is explained in a note by the transcriber inserted into the above-quoted passage in Chayei Moharan after the word “charity”: Transcriber’s note…. I heard from Rabbi Naftali (may his memory be for a blessing) that he was one of the two witnesses whom [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) designated regarding this matter…. And at that time [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) employed the following phrase: “When people come to my grave and donate a small coin to charity for my sake”–meaning, for the sake of having his holy soul in mind [so that merit will accrue to Rabbi Nachman], as is the custom.

Clearly, then, it is not the mitzvah of charity itself that is important here, but the fact that the coin is given while one has Rabbi Nachman’s soul in mind. In this 146 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiyato VIshivato B’Umin,” 225 [41]), p. 248.



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave 

 179

way, giving charity is transformed into a component in the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave expressing the connection between the Hasid and his rebbe. It is not the merit of the charity that aids the person engaging in this rectification, for he donates that merit to Rabbi Nachman when he bears his soul in mind. Rather, his connection to Rabbi Nachman brings about his rectification and salvation. In this context, the recitation of the ten psalms may also be understood as a Hasid’s expression of his faith in his rebbe, for these ten psalms are Rabbi Nachman’s unique innovation, of which he was deeply proud and spoke highly.147 By reciting these ten psalms, a person proclaims his faith in Rabbi Nachman and in his rectifications.148 Rabbi Nachman, for his part, assures everyone who engages in this ritual that Rabbi Nachman will personally dedicate himself to rectify and save him. This obligation is in force without dependence upon the gravity of the person’s wrongdoings and sins. All that is required is that when he comes to Rabbi Nachman’s grave he resolves that from now on he will not return to his foolish ways. Rabbi Nachman’s commitment accentuates the unique character of this new rectification. Unlike the rectification for a nocturnal emission, which Rabbi Nachman presented as effective due to its intrinsic power, aided by the unique qualities of the book of Psalms, the power of the new ritual derives from the connection between the Hasid and his rebbe, and from the personal responsibility that Rabbi Nachman has undertaken to save and rectify whoever fulfills his request and makes a pilgrimage to his grave. It can therefore be clearly determined that even though these two rectifications share a component–the recitation of the ten psalms–they comprise two separate rituals, different in their goals and in the manner that they are conducted, and they are clearly distinguishable from each other.

147 And the nature of this rectification–effected by means of reciting the above-noted ten chapters of psalms–is something completely new, a wondrous innovation … that was not known since the day of the creation of the world. Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 178–179, and in other sources 148 And it thus became accepted in Bratslav circles to say that “whoever recites the universal rectification is by virtue of this fact alone considered to be close to our rebbe (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing)” (Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 5, 369, p. 151).

180 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

“And he said that this is the universal rectification”: the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave as a universal rectification After Sichot Haran (141) describes Rabbi Nachman’s conversation with Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon in 5570, relating how he designated them as his witnesses regarding the importance of making a pilgrimage to his grave, it describes the ten psalms that a person should recite there. After this, the following words appear: “And [Rabbi Nachman] stated that a person should recite them in the order that they appear in [the book of] Psalms. And he said that this is the universal rectification. [That is] because every sin has its particular rectification, but the above-mentioned rectification is the universal rectification.”149 Here it appears as though the universal rectification, which throughout the years had undergone upheavals–both on the ideational plane and on the practical level of implementation–is now undergoing an additional development when Rabbi Nachman proposes a new way of applying it, proclaiming that the “above-mentioned rectification” of which he had spoken is now to be regarded as “the universal rectification.” But this sentence is unclear. What is the term, “the above-mentioned rectification,” referring to? Apparently, there are two ways to understand this. One is that “the above-mentioned rectification” is the rectification of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, which Rabbi Nachman has now established and communicated to Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon as his designated witnesses. If that is the case, Rabbi Nachman is saying this rectification of pilgrimage is the universal rectification. Alternatively, the expression, “the above-mentioned rectification,” refers to the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms in and of themselves–even when they are not part of the pilgrimage ritual to Rabbi Nachman’s grave. If this latter possibility is correct, then any recitation of the ten psalms–every “rectification for a nocturnal emission”–is now to be considered a “universal rectification.” I think that it is possible to demonstrate conclusively that the first option is the correct one: that Rabbi Nachman’s comment, “this is the universal rectification,” refers solely to the rectification of pilgrimage to his grave. I will substantiate this thesis below. But the existence of the second possibility, due to the ambiguity of this passage from Sichot Haran, has created the mistaken impression that Rabbi Nachman’s words here identify the rectification for a nocturnal emission with the universal rectification. That misunderstanding has done much to blur the important distinction between the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification. 149 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 180.



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave 

 181

In order to clarify the meaning of this phrase, I will examine its exact formulation and context as fully as possible. A description of this conversation appears in a suppressed passage from Chayei Moharan, which has been preserved in a number of slightly different versions, some of which have been published only recently.150 Thus, I will examine those versions here. I will begin with a brief description of the background of the omitted passages. Rabbi Natan of Nemirov wrote Chayei Moharan; however, for various reasons he did not publish it. His student, Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, published this work, but not before first removing various passages. Among these are conversations and stories that Rabbi Nachman himself requested not be publicized, as well as diverse statements made by Rabbi Nachman that aroused the fear that their publication might intensify the controversy against Bratslav Hasidism.151 Over the years, a few of the materials that had been suppressed were divulged, and some of them were restored in later editions. A significant step in the disclosure of this material was the publication by Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz of the Kuntres Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan in a single edition along with Rabbi Avraham Chazan’s Yemei HaTla’ot in 5693, in Jerusalem. Kuntres Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan contained a considerable portion of the elided passages–but not all of them.152 In 5760, the faction of Bratslav Hasidim loyal to Rabbi Israel Odesser published an edition of Chayei Moharan in Jerusalem that includes the majority of omitted portions–but again, not all of them. Rabbi Nachman’s significant conversation with Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon under discussion here was one of the passages that underwent censorship.  This conversation included Rabbi Nachman’s relating “The Story of the Armor,” a secret narrative regarding which he warned explicitly that it “should be a secret, and they should only reveal it to select individuals.”153 As a result of this warning, the story was removed when the description of this conversation was published in Sichot Haran and Chayei Moharan, along with the removal of several related sentences.154 In order to make the passage flow, the sentences around this lacuna were connected together, but clumsily, causing errors in wording and the dislocation of certain sentences from their context. Examination of the manuscripts shows that the original, correct wording is: “And he said that it is the universal rectification, for every sin has its particular rectification, but the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his grave–is the 150 Chayei Moharan Im HaHashmatot (5760); Chayei Moharan Im Hashmatot (5765). 151 See Naveh Tzaddikim, p. 76. 152 Regarding this, see above, Chapter 2, note 3. 153 Hashmatot MiChayei Moharan, in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), p. 193. 154 Chapter 6 of this book is dedicated to “The Story of the Armor.”

182 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

universal rectification” (italics mine, here and further on–Zvi Mark). This precise wording denotes indisputably that Rabbi Nachman’s phrase, “This is the universal rectification,” refers solely to the rectification of pilgrimage to his grave and not to the recitation of the psalms in and of themselves. I will specify a number of manuscripts whose wording leads to this important conclusion, and I will also reinforce that conclusion with additional sources. An important manuscript in which this wording is found is that of Rabbi Alter Tepliker. Rabbi Alter Tepliker (whose original name was Rabbi Moshe Yehoshua Bezshilianski155), was the aide and right-hand man of Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, who published Chayei Moharan and who decided what to include and what to delete. Rabbi Alter copied all of the suppressed passages and gathered them in a collection called Sefer HaHashmatot MiSefer Chayei Moharan. Rabbi Alter’s original manuscript, written in 5658, exists to this day.156 This manuscript includes the words of Rabbi Nachman under discussion here. The introduction to this elided section states, “Connected to Sichot Haran, following the stories,157 passage 141.” And the wording is (as was stated above): “but the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his grave–is the universal rectification.”158 (Regarding this section of the manuscript, see photograph 5 in Appendix 3). Another relevant manuscript is a copy of Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan made by Rabbi Shmerl of Berditchev in 5676 (1915) and inserted into Pinkas Min HaChavurah Mishnayot (‘Record Book of the Mishnah Group,’ described as “followers of ‘the flowing river, source of wisdom’ [Proverbs 18:4]”–a phrase whose acronym is “Nachman”–“who are called Bratslaver Hasidim, of the local holy community of Berditchev.” Rabbi Shmerl, son of Rabbi Eliyahu of Berditchev, was among the students of Rabbi Avraham, son of Rabbi Nachman of Tulchyn ([last name,] Chazan). It is said that Rabbi Shmerl’s brother was the scribe of Rabbi Avraham, son of Rabbi Nachman of Tulchyn (Chazan).159 The manuscript is at present in the Academic Library for the Sciences of Ukraine in Kiev.160 155 Murdered by anti-Semitic rioters in 5679. Rabbi Alter’s father, Rabbi Asher Zelig of Teplik, was a student of Rabbi Natan of Nemirov. Rabbi Alter was a student of Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin and son-in-law of Rabbi Nachman of Tulchyn. He composed many books, among them Hishtapkhut HaNefesh and Meshivat Nefesh. He was known to possess a copy of Megillat Setarim and other manuscripts. For more about him, see Gidulei HaNachal, pp. 13–14. 156 Regarding the history of the manuscript and the way in which it left Ukraine, see Uman, Kah Nifratzah HaDerekh, pp. 10–101, 173. A slightly more detailed description of the manuscript is given in the next chapter. 157 Sichot Haran was originally published as an appendix to Sipurei Ma’asiyot. 158 Page 23. 159 Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 4, 5668, p. 200; ibid., 693, p. 204. 160 Academic Library of the Sciences of the Ukraine (Kiev), archive 21, number 11/(5).



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave 

 183

The wording in this manuscript is similar to the formulation of the Tepliker manuscript: “And he said that this is the universal rectification, because every sin has its particular rectification, but the above-mentioned rectification–i.e., to be at his grave and recite the ten chapters of psalms there–is the universal rectification.”161 This wording as well shows that the rectification under discussion is “to be at his grave,” and the ten chapters of psalms are psalms that a person must recite “there”–i.e., at Rabbi Nachman’s grave. Only that “is the universal rectification.” Also, the edition of Chayei Moharan Im Hashmatot that was published in Jerusalem in 5760 contains the wording, “But the above-mentioned rectification– to be at his grave–is the universal rectification.”162 Elsewhere in that edition, Passage 225 again describes the commitment that Rabbi Nachman made to Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon that if a person will come to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, give charity on Rabbi Nachman’s behalf, recite the ten chapters of psalms and undertake not to return to his foolishness, Rabbi Nachman will bring him out of gehennom by his sidelocks. Here too Rabbi Nachman’s words are quoted: “And he said that this is the universal rectification, for every sin has its particular rectification, but the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his grave–is the universal rectification.”163 In one of the copies that Rabbi Yitzhak Meir Korman made of Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan, the sentence appears as it is in the published versions,164 and the same applies to Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan, which Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz published in 5693.165 It should be borne in mind that this version, which does not make clear which rectification Rabbi Nachman was referring to, is neutral, and thus may be explained as referring to the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave. Therefore, it does not comprise a proof one way or the other, and as such it should not be seen as expressing a different tradition on this topic.166 161 Page 9. 162 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiyato LeNavritsh,” 162), p. 195. 163 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiyato VIshivato B’Umin,” 41), p. 248. 164 The manuscript is called Yalkut Moharan. In the introduction, Rabbi Yitzhak Meir Korman writes: “In [this manuscript] all of the matters and talks that were not yet published from the book Chayei Moharan and from other manuscripts from our rebbe are filled out and written … all brought here for an eternal remembrance.” The manuscript was copied in 5687. In other manuscripts that Rabbi Yitzhak Meir copied, and in which “The Story of the Armor” is included, this sentence does not appear. 165 Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot [5693]), p. 193. 166 I have photocopies of three other copies of omissions from Chayei Moharan that were made at a later period and typed on a typewriter. In all of them, the wording is, “But the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his grave.” At the top of one copy appears the title, Hashmatot MiSefer Chayei Moharan SheNe’etak Al Yedei R. Alter Tepliker, Hashem Yakum Damo, MiKhtav Yad

184 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

I will conclude by quoting the words of Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin in his Parpar’ot LeChokhmah, which indicate that Rabbi Nachman’s statement, “This is the universal rectification,” refers to the pilgrimage to his grave. And [Rabbi Nachman] immediately revealed his holy sentiment to the Hasidim that his will is very strong that they should involve themselves with his holy grave–i.e., to come there to learn and pray and recite psalms with intent and an arousal of the heart. And he (may his memory be for a blessing) will have great delights from this and re-invigoration, etc. And [in exchange] for this, he will strive for our good and the rectification of our souls forever. And he once said explicitly, “I want to remain among you, [in that] you will come to my grave, etc.” And these words of his, “I want to remain among you,” possess exceedingly great depth, as is explained in a little hint in Chayei Moharan. (In particular, at the time that he told and revealed the topic of the wondrous and awesome rectification of the ten chapters of psalms, at that time he also said that after he passes away, etc., whoever will come to his grave and donate a small coin to charity and recite these ten chapters of psalms there, then even etc., [Rabbi Nachman] will extend himself to the length and breadth to save him and rectify him, etc. And he said that this is the universal rectification. And he designated witnesses for this, as it is all described elsewhere [Sichot Haran, 141]).167

It may thus be concluded categorically that Rabbi Nachman never stated that a person who engages in the rectification for a nocturnal emission in the proper manner and in its proper time, or who recites the ten psalms at some other opportunity, is engaged in the universal rectification. Rabbi Nachman only designated

Moharanat Zal (‘Censored Passages from Chayei Moharan, Copied by Rabbi Alter Tepliker, May God Avenge His Blood, From the Manuscript of Rabbi Natan, May His Memory Be for a Blessing’). Another omitted passage comes from a writings that apparently had been in the possession of Rabbi Natan Liebermensch. It has the wording, “But the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his grave, etc.–is the universal rectification” (p. 9, in numbering that was added by hand to the published pages). 167 In Parpar’ot LeChokhmah, Part 1, 61, p. 34a–34b. This is also the implication of another passage from Parpar’ot LeChokhmah, as follows. Also, our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) involved himself a great deal in giving merit to Israel in [helping them] guard the covenant (as he [may his memory be for a blessing] explains much about this in his own words). Also, he revealed the rectification for a blemish to the covenant [brought about] by a nocturnal emission, heaven forbid–that rectification being the [recitation of the] ten chapters of psalms that he revealed. And he also said that after he passes away, when people come to his grave and recite these ten chapters of psalms there, he will strive on their behalf (as [mentioned] above). And he said that this is the universal rectification. Ibid., 8:19, p. 110



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave 

 185

“the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his grave” as “the universal rectification.” The nature of the phenomena involved also supports this conclusion. As explained earlier, the rectification for a nocturnal emission remedies a particular blemish in the realm of holiness of the covenant. Its specific character weighs against it functioning as a universal rectification for all blemishes of the covenant and certainly against it functioning as a universal rectification for the totality of human trespasses. Indeed this rectification serves as an outstanding model of the polar opposite of the universal rectification. It is precisely regarding such a rectification that Rabbi Nachman states that “every sin has its unique rectification”; and so it is unreasonable to presume that Rabbi Nachman would define specifically that “unique rectification” intended for a very specific blemish as a “universal rectification.” Conversely, the rectification of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave is not intended to redress a particular sin or blemish, and so it may more easily be conceived of as a universal rectification. Moreover, the view that this is a universal rectification conforms to Rabbi Nachman’s pledge that he will commit himself to extricate from gehennom whoever makes that pilgrimage to his grave, no matter what his sins, for the universal rectification of sins of the past, with the addition of a person’s resolution “not to return to his foolishness,”168 constitutes complete repentance,169 which can provide the power to wrest a person from gehennom.

The ten psalms and giving charity as components of the universal rectification As noted above, Rabbi Nachman told his Hasidim that the pilgrimage to his grave could serve as a universal rectification. And that characterization accords with the fact that the pilgrimage is not intended to rectify any particular blemish. Nevertheless, there is still a question as to whether the specific components associated with that pilgrimage–i.e., reciting the psalms and donating charity– have an inherent link to the universal rectification (besides the fact that their performance expresses the connection of the Hasid to his rebbe). The following analysis is dedicated to answering this point. As discussed earlier, in his discourse, “Hai Gavra D’Azeil,” Rabbi Nachman describes praising tzaddikim as one way of achieving the universal rectifica168 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiyato VIshivato B’Umin,” 225 [41]), p. 248. 169 Regarding regret over the past and resolution for the future as components of the confession that a person is obligated to recite at the time that he repents, see Maimonides, Mishneh Torah (“Hilkhot Teshuvah,” 1:1).

186 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

tion, because doing so elevates a person’s mind and rectifies his speech. Rabbi Nachman adds that “When [the angels] want to make speech that will be heeded and accepted among them … they first praise and glorify the Lord, be He blessed, Who is the Tzaddik of the world.”170 The book of Psalms is, as a whole, a paean of praise of and thanks to God, the Tzaddik of the world. The recitation of the ten psalms–as a distillation of the entire book of Psalms, encompassing all of its ten expressions of melody–is thus an expression of the praise of the Tzaddik of the world. In that sense, it constitutes a universal rectification that can elevate and rectify a person’s mind no less than engaging in the praise of a flesh and blood tzaddik. In addition, when a person recites these ten psalms as part of his pilgrimage to the gravesite of the tzaddik because the tzaddik requested that people do so and because of this person’s faith in the power of that tzaddik’s rectifications, that not only praises the Tzaddik of the world but also the greatness of the flesh and blood tzaddik, Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav. The idea that reciting the ten psalms constitutes a way of attaining universal rectification could not have been made in the first years of the establishment of the universal rectification. As was noted above, the initial goal of that initial rectification was to break and dispirit a person’s evil inclination, via a person’s demonstrating his willingness to suffer castration and blindness. At that time, reciting verses of the Shema–which expresses a person’s acceptance of the yoke of the sovereignty of heaven with his entire body and soul, as in the case of Rabbi Akiva, who recited the Shema while the Romans were raking his flesh with iron combs and who said, “Throughout my entire life I was concerned [and hoping for the moment when such martyrdom] might be my lot, and I would experience it”171–was appropriate for attaining this rectification, and not reciting chapters of psalms, which are songs of praise and joy. The profound change that occurred in the nature of the universal rectification–from the attempt to break and nullify one’s evil inclination to the challenge that a person elevate his spirit by engaging in positive action, such as giving charity and praising the tzaddikim–made it possible to view the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms, which distill the praise of the Tzaddik of the world, as a component of the universal rectification. The topic of charity is better appreciated in this light. As noted earlier regarding “Hai Gavra D’Azeil,” Rabbi Nachman states that giving charity is the universal

170 Likutei Moharan I 29:2. 171 b. Yoma 19b. In Likutei Moharan, Rabbi Nachman explains that every time that Rabbi Akiva recited the Shema he literally felt the pangs of death, for he relinquished his soul to death (Likutei Moharan I 193).



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave 

 187

rectification for business: it is the universal rectification of money. “And giving is the level of the universal rectification, which is charity.”172 It is thus clear that in the rectification of pilgrimage to his grave Rabbi Nachman combined the two universal rectifications that he had proposed and given as examples in “Hai Gavra D’Azeil”: speech in praise of the tzaddik and giving charity. This set of correspondences and Rabbi Nachman’s explicit statement that “to be at his grave … is the universal rectification”173 can more fully explain the power of a person’s pilgrimage to the grave of the tzaddik to liberate that person from gehennom and save him from all of his sins. A person’s pilgrimage to the grave of the tzaddik and his connection with the tzaddik possess those qualities that exist in the universal rectification. The focus of a person’s gaze on that which is good and holy, his contact and connection with that which is elevated and uplifted, his words of praise and his deeds of charity, all have the ability to raise him and arouse him to universal repentance, to universal rectification–“even if that person has become whatever he has become, even if he transgressed whatever he transgressed.”174 And with the power of that elevation of spirit and clinging to holiness, “he makes a commitment not to return to his foolishness, heaven forbid.”175 And in this way, that person will make it possible for the tzaddik to draw him by his sidelocks away from the gehennom that had been awaiting him. This contributes in particular to understanding the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave that takes place specifically on Rosh Hashanah. Rosh Hashanah is unique in that it is a day of universal repentance for all of a person’s sins–repentance that does not focus on those sins but that results from a person’s focus on the praiseworthiness and greatness of the Tzaddik of the world. In bold contrast to Yom Kippur–which involves a great deal of confession and remorseful striking of one’s chest with the accompanying formula, “for the sin that we sinned…,” and a detailed account of sins–on Rosh Hashanah a person does not confess any details of his sins. Rather, the theme of Rosh Hashanah is praise of the Creator, King of the world: “And every created being will understand that You created him and all that has soul in his nostril will say: the Lord, God of Israel is King and His sovereignty rules over all” (prayerbook). As a result of that, the person is elevated and uplifted. “And in this way he automatically rectifies everything.”176 172 Likutei Moharan I 29:9. 173 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiyato LeNavritsh,” 162), p. 195. 174 Ibid., (“Nesiyato VIshivato B’Umin,” 225 (41)), p. 248. 175 Ibid. 176 This is in keeping with Rabbi Nachman’s words in relation to the universal rectification in Likutei Moharan I 29:10.

188 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

These words closely match Rabbi Nachman’s teaching that he delivered after Rosh Hashanah, following Shabbat Teshuvah in 5665,177 in praise of repentance that emerges from joy. The essence of the high level of weeping is [attained] when it results from joy and gladness. And even regret is very good when it is due to joy–when, due to a person’s great amount of joy in the Lord, be He blessed, he regrets and languishes greatly, because he had rebelled against Him in earlier days. And weeping is aroused in [this person] out of a great deal of joy. And that is [alluded to in the fact that the Hebrew word for ‘weeping,’] bekhiah, is the acronym of [the phrase,] beshimkhah yagilun kol hayom”–‘in Your name they rejoice all the day’ (Psalms 89:17)–[meaning] that the essence of weeping is [attained when] it is due to joy in His Name, be He blessed.178

This verse, “In Your name they rejoice all the day,” introduces one of the highpoints of the Rosh Hashanah service: the shofar blowing. The person about to blow the shofar recites this verse, which is repeated by the congregation. The Talmudic sages instruct that the shofar blasts must have a weeping and wailing sound.179 But even this weeping, states Rabbi Nachman, must not emanate from a person’s suffering and depression over his sins and blemishes, but rather from joy. The sound of the shofar, which is the sound of weeping, regret and repentance, must originate in joy–for “in Your name they rejoice all the day.” That is the fresh character of the rectification that Rabbi Nachman proposes: repentance and rectification that originate in joy and gladness.

More regarding the question of the connection between the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification I have underscored the difference between the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification. Towards his death Rabbi Nachman incorporated the recitation of the ten psalms (associated with the rectification for a nocturnal emission) into the universal rectification of pilgrimage to his grave. I explained that reciting these ten psalms can serve as a component of a universal rectification, since they praise the tzaddik and the Tzaddik of the world. The question thus arises whether this latter function in the recitation of the ten

The topic of Rosh Hashanah in Bratslav Hasidism of course requires clarification and study in itself. In Chapter 9, I will expand on this somewhat. 177 Cf. Chayei Moharan (“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” [59]), p. 71. 178 Likutei Moharan I 175. 179 b. Rosh Hashanah 33b.



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave 

 189

psalms maintains a connection with the function of the rectification for a nocturnal emission. It is possible that that answer is yes: that the recitation of the ten psalms retains its function as a rectification of the covenant. As demonstrated earlier, in its original context the recitation of the ten psalms was not intended as a universal rectification concerning all matters of the covenant but was intended to rectify a specific blemish of the covenant. At any rate, it serves as one type of rectification of the covenant. The incorporation of a rectification of the covenant into the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, a ritual in which a person is summoned to universal repentance for all of his sins and required to commit himself not to return to his foolishness can represent the need for a rectification of the covenant as a part of the universal repentance and universal rectification. Even according to this approach, the differentiation between the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification remains strong and marked. The rectification for a nocturnal emission possesses its own components and intentions, and the universal rectification is inherently different from it, both in its intentions and in its practical implementation. Rabbi Nachman never proposed that the ritual of rectification for a nocturnal emission or the recitation of the ten psalms should, in and of itself, serve as a universal rectification. Rabbi Nachman only stated that the rectification of pilgrimage to his grave, with all of its components–one of them being the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms– constitutes the universal rectification.

A methodological note Awareness of the ritual character of both the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave facilitates a more precise understanding of their nature and purpose. Rabbi Nachman viewed the rectification for a nocturnal emission as “a wondrous innovation, for it is a very, very wondrous and awesome rectification…. And he said that this was not known since the day of the creation of the world.”180 A person who only read this and possessed no prior knowledge of that rectification would be stunned to discover that this “wondrous innovation” is encapsulated in the injunction to recite a few chapters of psalms. Apparently, nothing could be more commonplace. Thus, there can be no doubt that the “wondrous innovation” inheres in the transformation of the recitation of psalms into a ritual, and in the fact that this 180 Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 178–179.

190 

 The Formulation of the Universal Rectification

ritual has the power to rectify the blemish generated by a nocturnal emission. The recitation of these psalms receives new meaning and power because it is now a component of a ritual that had never before existed.181 The ritualization of reciting psalms in a rectification for a nocturnal emission is effected in a number of ways: the linkage of the recitation to the day on which the nocturnal emission occurred; its amalgamation with other components such as immersion in a mikveh, specific “intentions” that must accompany the recitation, the attribution of a specific power to the recitation, the number of psalms recited, and–from a certain stage in the development of this rectification–the decision as to which chapters of psalms are to be recited. The very defining of the recitation of ten chapters of psalms as a “rectification” implies that the recitation possesses ritual meaning. The emphasis upon the ritualistic aspects of both rectifications–the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the rectification of pilgrimage–accentuates the idea that even though both rectifications feature the same ten psalms are recited, the two rectifications are separate, with divergent functions and goals.182

7 The connection between the rectifications and messianic fervor A step-by-step study of the development of the rectifications that scrupulously maintains the distinction between their conceptual outlooks shows that the conjecture raised by various scholars of a link between the universal rectification and the spirit of acute messianic fervor that prevailed among Bratslav Hasidim in the years 5565–5566183 is problematic and requires renewed investigation. Rabbi Nachman apparently began to apply himself to the universal rectification as early as 5562–a year that is not known as having possessed especial messianic fervor. Rabbi Nachman came back to work on the development of the universal rectification in Shavuot of 5566, prior to the death of his son, at a time that messianic fervor in Bratslav was at its peak. Afterwards, about half a year before his death, by which time the messianic fervor had waned and Rabbi Nachman

181 Later on, in Chapter 6, I discuss the question of why Rabbi Nachman attributes such great meaning to this rectification. 182 The attitude of Bratslav Hasidism to these rectifications of Rabbi Nachman is a topic within itself, which I discuss in Chapter 9. 183 See Green, Tormented Master pp. 183–184, 207–208; Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 254.



The connection between the rectifications and messianic fervor 

 191

had proclaimed that “the messiah will certainly not come for another hundred years,”184 he returned to work on the universal rectification. As for his work on the rectification for a nocturnal emission, it had begun in 5565, a year freighted with messianic activity. But he came back to deal with it and explain its significance in 5569, about three years after the messianic fervor had died down; and only in 5570, shortly before his death, did he reveal which chapters of psalms are to be recited in the framework of the rectification for a nocturnal emission. Therefore, in chronological terms there is no correspondence between Rabbi Nachman’s involvement in the universal rectification or the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the acute messianic fervor that dominated during a certain period in Bratslav Hasidism. Nevertheless, that in itself does not suffice to deny in principle a possible connection between the rectifications and messianic zeal. In my humble opinion, such a link does indeed exist, and I will address it in the following chapters. But it may be indisputably concluded that such a connection was not associated with the intensification of the messianic fervor that occurred during a particular period in Bratslav Hasidism, nor with a sense that the messianic hope might be immediately or imminently realized. Just as prayers that center on the messianic hope, such as “Quickly cause the shoot of David your servant to sprout” and even “Next year in rebuilt Jerusalem,” are not necessarily connected to periods in which messianic fervor is particularly acute and not even to periods in which people believe that phrases like “next year” possess especial, urgent meaning are an expression of the perennial Jewish messianic hope, so too, it appears, the messianic elements in Rabbi Nachman’s universal rectification have no connection to the arousal of particular messianic fervor in a certain time, but are part of the greater whole of the rectifications and actions that Jews engage in so as to “raise the Shekhinah from her dust” and hasten the coming of the redemption.

184 “Afterwards, when the child passed away, our rebbe said, ‘The messiah will certainly not come for at least another hundred years’” (Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 2, 132, p. 36).

Chapter Five The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice of not Avoiding Tests “Let us go to the doorway of a brothel and overcome our [evil] inclination, and receive reward.”1

1 “He desired tests” The previous chapter, in the course of analyzing Rabbi Nachman’s discourse, “B’Karov Alai M’rei’im,”2 which discusses the universal rectification, showed that Rabbi Nachman viewed the resistance to temptation as a necessary prerequisite to attaining the “revelation of the Torah.” In keeping with the kabbalistic teachings of Rabbi Moshe Cordovero, Rabbi Nachman compares this to breaking a husk in order to reach the desired fruit within it. “B’Karov Alai M’rei’im” does not tell what a person should do if he yearns to attain a revelation of the Torah but he has not been confronted by temptations. Other sources shed light on Rabbi Nachman’s response to this question by demonstrating not only that Rabbi Nachman was interested in undergoing such tests but that he even prayed that God test him repeatedly–particularly, in the sexual realm. Before [Rabbi Nachman] attained the level on which this [sexual] desire was completely nullified and disgusting to him, he experienced quite a number of very great and terrible tests involving this desire. This is impossible to explain in detail, because in the midst of the days of his youth, at the time that a person’s blood is boiling, he experienced many tremendous tests without number regarding this desire, when he had the power to fulfill his desire, and he was in extremely great danger. But he was strong and heroic, and he overcame his [evil] inclination and crushed his [sexual] desire quite a number of times. Yet nevertheless, after [such an incident] he did not avoid and flee being tested. To the contrary, he desired tests, and he prayed that the Lord, be He blessed, send him tests, because he was confident that he would certainly not rebel against the Lord, be He blessed.3 How could he possibly commit a sin, heaven forbid, and transgress the will of the Lord, be He blessed, unless he was insane at the time, heaven forbid? But since he would have some

1 b. Avodah Zarah 17b. 2 Likutei Moharan I 36. 3 Regarding Rabbi Nachman’s absolute assurance that he would pass every test unless God made him insane, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 66–69 (in the Hebrew edition only).



“He desired tests” 

 193

ability to think at the time of the test, he would certainly be able to withstand [it] with [the aid of] the great strength of his heart that was deeply dedicated to the Lord.4 Yet nevertheless, at the time that he experienced the test he was in very great danger, and he cried out a great deal to the Lord, be He blessed, until he succeeded in overcoming his [evil] inclination so that he was saved. Yet nevertheless, he did not avoid another test, even though while he had been tested he had experienced great difficulty (as [mentioned] above). And this happened many, many times, without number. And the Lord, be He blessed, helped him so that he succeeded in overcoming his [evil] inclination and breaking the flaming fire of this general desire.5

Rabbi Nachman’s practice in dealing with tests supports the idea that he saw a test as a challenge that, when overcome, could bring him to spiritual growth that cannot be attained in any other fashion. What was the nature of these tests in the realm of erotic desire that Rabbi Nachman experienced in the days of his youth, at the time that a person’s blood is boiling? Since Rabbi Nachman viewed every stray sinful thought and lustful desire with especial stringency, one might conjecture that he was not fighting the temptation to physically realize a desire, but the temptation to contemplate a forbidden desire. However, the formulation, “when he had the power to fulfill his desire, and he was in extremely great danger,” indicates that he was being tempted to the realization of such a desire. Rabbi Natan leaves unspecified what sort of sexual temptation Rabbi Nachman would not refrain from facing. It is evident from Rabbi Natan’s words that he knew more than he said about various tests that Rabbi Nachman underwent in his youth, but he decided that–for reasons that he did not explicate–“this is impossible to explain.” Nevertheless, as I will discuss further on, Bratslav Hasidim kept at least an incomplete record of Rabbi Nachman’s tests, but one that they chose not to publish and make generally accessible. An echo of one of these episodes appears in Chayei Moharan: When [Rabbi Nachman and his traveling companion] returned from the land of Israel, as they journeyed from the Dniester River they had to change their garments, and they appeared in the way that young merchants now customarily [appear], etc. As a result, a number of people took them to be frivolous, etc. 4 On the link between yearning and madness in Rabbi Nachman’s teachings, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 59–69 (in the Hebrew edition only). 5 Shivchei Haran, 16, pp. 18–19. And see also Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Yegiato V’Tirchato B’Avodat Hashem,” 232–233 [3–4]), pp. 198–199; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 37–40; Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 59–69 (in the Hebrew edition only).

194 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

And when [Rabbi Nachman] came to Uman, [he and his companion] underwent a test, etc. And then, immediately upon leaving that place in haste, [Rabbi Nachman] judged the people [there] favorably and said, “Know that the entirety of our way is to know that there are tests in the world and that a person can easily stumble, heaven forbid.” And he said, “Woe, woe!” (And he sighed deeply because of this, because in the house) where he had been staying, (to which) the wagon-driver (had come), [Rabbi Nachman and his companion] had understood and seen that it was filled with much lewdness and lustfulness (may the Compassionate One protect us), etc. But [Rabbi Nachman] said that with the help of the Lord, be He blessed, it would be a good thing that he had been there (in the house), because from now on there would no longer be any lewdness in that house. And then his mind was set at ease.6

The test is described here in broad strokes only. When Rabbi Nachman and his traveling companion arrived in Uman, they stopped at an inn where there was “much lewdness and lustfulness.” However, no details are given of what happened and what test they underwent. The antecedent to making this test possible was apparently their decision to dress as “in the way that young merchants now customarily [appear].” This created the impression that they too were “frivolous” young men, as a result of which people in the inn attempted to entice them. This implies that if they had been dressed as Hasidim, and certainly if Rabbi Nachman had been dressed and had been acting as an admor, no one would have attempted to entice them. Possibly the very fact that Rabbi Nachman traveled in this way, without wearing the garments that would serve as protection against undesirable temptations, exemplified his practice of not fleeing tests and not surrounding himself with barriers to impede every possible blandishment. On his trip to and from the land of Israel, and on his other journeys as well, Rabbi Nachman traveled incognito, hiding his personal identity and his communal and religious affiliations– conduct that by its very nature was liable to expose him to temptations.7 Thus, in addition to asking God to expose him to tests, Rabbi Nachman conducted himself in a way that exposed him to such trials. Rabbi Nachman apparently saw this approach as a unique way to serve God. Its goal was to reach personal insights and revelations that can only be attained 6 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiato L’Eretz Yisrael,” 145 [17]), p. 180. 7 On the way to the land of Israel, he hid his identity “and he appeared in public as a person of no account” (Chayei Moharan, [“Nesiato L’Eretz Yisrael,” 139, (11)], p. 176). Also on his journey to Novorich, “he traveled [with his identity] concealed from people”; “and afterwards he traveled to Novorich and he was in Zaslov and in Ostroh and in Dubna and in Brody and other places, where he disguised himself and people did not recognize him” (ibid. [“Nesiyato LeNavritsh,” 154 (4), 157 (7)], pp. 190–191).



Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests 

 195

by a person who breaks his desires–a goal germane to the function of the tzaddik on behalf of the entire community, a community that does not remain within restricted domains but lives in an environment saturated by temptations. Rabbi Nachman’s words, “Know that the entirety of our way is to know that there are tests in the world and that a person can easily stumble, heaven forbid,” indicate that this attitude was not incidental but something fundamental and encompassing in Rabbi Nachman’s approach: “the entirety of our way.” Also, Rabbi Nachman’s success in bringing about a change so that “from now on there would no longer be lewdness in that house,” which eased his mind, teaches that he saw his journeys and the tests that he underwent while traveling as an opportunity to nullify negative phenomena that arouse temptation–an enterprise that requires direct contact with those phenomena. This activity of Rabbi Nachman may be seen as one avenue of his work as a tzaddik who is concerned not only for his own spiritual well-being but also for addressing sins and flaws in which others “can easily stumble.” On this particular avenue, Rabbi Nachman attempts to prevent such stumbling and tests from occurring. Rabbi Nachman also proceeded along another avenue consisting of creating “rectifications,” their purpose being to rectify sins and blemishes that had already occurred. These two avenues apparently share a common denominator: the perspective that only a person who himself has withstood temptations and tests can nullify them in advance or rectify them ex post facto. I will go on to discuss other tests that Rabbi Nachman underwent, and then return to this idea.

2 Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests There are two testimonies that speak of a manuscript that was in the possession of the Bratslav Hasid, Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman (d. 5727), containing descriptions gathered from various sources, describing tests that Rabbi Nachman underwent. The first testimony is that of Abraham Meir Habermann, who was director of the Schocken Library in Jerusalem and a prolific author.8 Habermann was in touch with a number of Bratslav Hasidim in Jerusalem who were engaged in publishing books and involved with Hasidic manuscripts. Among these Hasidim were Rabbis Shmuel Horowitz, Meir Anshin and–relevant here–Yitzchak Meir Korman.9 Habermann tells the following. 8 About him, see Zilbershlag, “Habermann,” pp. 377–394. 9 I hope to dedicate an essay to the interesting connection that Shmuel Yosef Agnon, Gershom Schocken and the Schocken Library maintained with the Bratslav Hasidim of Jerusalem.

196 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

The prominent Bratslav Hasid, Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman, testified to me that he saw in the possession of Rabbi Zalman Lubarski of Tcherin–the grandson [sic] of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav–a manuscript in the style of Chayei Moharan that included “narratives and tests” in Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav’s handwriting, with a note that these stories are not to be made public.10

Habermann thus reports that Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman told that he had seen a secret manuscript describing the tests that Rabbi Nachman underwent. Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman grew up in Lublin, Poland. In his youth, he became a Bratslav Hasid and he traveled to Tcherin and Uman in the Ukraine in order to familiarize himself with the established communities of Bratslav Hasidism there. Later on, he moved to the land of Israel, where he engaged in attaining and copying manuscripts. He made copies of secret Bratslav manuscripts, many of which are still extant.11 As for Rabbi Zalman Lubarski, who lived in Tcherin, he was a great-grandson of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav.12 However, as will be discussed further on, other testimony and some apparent discrepancies about this booklet render a number of details in this passage by Abraham Habermann questionable. The second testimony to the existence of such a booklet is that of Rabbi Natan Tzvi Koenig in his Naveh Tzaddikim, which contains a passage that is apparently about the same booklet referred to by Habermann. Rabbi Natan Tzvi Koenig describes a manuscript written in 5677, which he states is called Kuntres HaNisyonot (Booklet of Tests). He quotes from the booklet and implies that it is in his possession. Although the name of the author does not appear on the booklet, Rabbi Natan Tzvi says that “it appears to be, as is verified by the handwriting,” composed by Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman. The contents of the manuscript consist of a description of the various tests that Rabbi Nachman underwent, for “it is known that the admor, may the memory of a holy tzaddik be for a blessing, underwent tests in serving the Lord, some of which are alluded to in a number of [his] discourses and statements, albeit in subtle hints that are difficult to fathom.”13 Rabbi Natan Tzvi Koenig quotes a section of the booklet: 10 Habermann, Anshei Sefer, p. 241. 11 Regarding Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman, see Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 233–236. 12 Rabbi Zalman Lubarski of Tcherin was the son of Rabbi Nachman Chayales (“Chayales” means ‘[son] of Chayale’ [“Chayale” is the diminutive of “Chaya”). Rabbi Nachman Chayales’ mother, Chaya (whose husband was called Rabbi Zalman Lubarski), was the daughter of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav. See Cheshin, Matmonim, p. 137, note 16; Gidulei HaNachal, p. 76. 13 Naveh Tzaddikim, p. 207.

Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests 



 197

And this is what [the manuscript] says regarding the discourse, Likutei Moharan I 257, which begins, “Regarding the verse, ‘When you enter your neighbor’s vineyard,’ etc. (Deuteronomy 23:25). [This is] based on the episode, etc.”: I [Rabbi Korman] asked a number of the major Hasidim about this story, but they knew nothing of the story. However, when I had the merit to be in the city of Tcherin, where a group of our comrades live, Hasidim [including] wealthy laymen, [I met] one rabbi [who is a] scribe and cantor, whom everyone calls Rabbi Avraham Sofer, who is grandson of our teacher, Moharanat [Rabbi Natan] (may the memory of a holy tzaddik be for a blessing), and grandson of the rabbi, Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing). He is a Hasid and scholar and intelligent, etc. I asked him about this story as well as the meaning of the entire discourse. But he did not want to tell me anything at all. However, I pleaded with him and told him that I will not reveal the above-mentioned story [that I hope to hear] to anyone. He told me the following: “It was the way of my grandfather, the rabbi, [Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin] (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing), that he sought to know every [background] episode that inspired [Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav to deliver his discourses with their] secrets. “And his most reliable source of stories was Rabbi Nachman of Tulchyn, and [my grandfather also learned] a little from Rabbi Moshe Bratslaver (may his memory be for a blessing). And utilizing this approach, [my grandfather, Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin,] composed Parpar’ot LeChokhmah. Before commenting on a discourse, he revealed the events by means of which that discourse came into being. “And that story [alluded to at the beginning of Likutei Moharan I 257 provides the background] for that above-mentioned discourse. And [that story] is also relevant to the discourse, Likutei Moharan II 88. [This is] because [these two discourses were originally] delivered as one discourse, but afterwards our rebbe, [Rabbi Nachman] (may the memory of a holy tzaddik be for a blessing) divided it into two discourses, etc.”14

According to this, Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman apparently heard from Rabbi Avraham Sofer that people had collected stories–whether in writing or orally is not said–when Rabbi Korman was in Tcherin. In contrast to Habermann’s testimony of what Rabbi Korman said, Rabbi Korman does not state that Rabbi Zalman Lubarski of Tcherin (great-grandson of Rabbi Nachman) showed him a manuscript, but that Rabbi Avraham Sofer told him a story. Rabbi Avraham Sofer is another name for Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz (also called Kokhav Lev – the Hebrew for Sternhartz) (5619/5622–5715). 14 Ibid., pp. 207–208.

198 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz had a brilliant ancestry. He was the grandson of Rabbi Natan of Nemirov and of Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, and he as well had access to esoteric Bratslav traditions. Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz too lived in Tcherin. He moved to the land of Israel in 5696, where he established the Meron faction of Bratslav Hasidim. Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman became one of Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz’s close students.15 I was not able to find the manuscript that Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman composed/saw/copied, entitled Kuntres HaNisyonot. However, the particular story that inspired the above-mentioned discourses and that describes a test that Rabbi Nachman underwent apparently is extant in another manuscript and can be identified. And it is apparently the episode that is also described as being recorded in Kuntres HaNisyonot. For the sake of clarity, I will refer to this story as “The Story of the Plums.” “The Story of the Plums” appears in a large manuscript of Rabbi Moshe Yehoshua Bezshilianski (known more popularly as Rabbi Alter Tepliker). This manuscript includes copies of a number of significant Bratslav texts. The first part of the manuscript is a copy of the will of the rabbi of Tcherin, Rabbi Nachman (5654). The second part is a copy of Sefer Hashmatot MiSefer Chayei Moharan (5658), and the third part is a copy of Hashmatot MiSefer Yemei Moharanat. These two parts contain passages removed at the time that Chayei Moharan and Yemei Moharanat went to press. The fourth part consists of a copy of Megillat Setarim, a manuscript that contains two conversations of Rabbi Nachman describing “the way in which the righteous redeemer will come,” and which until recently was one of the most recondite secrets of Bratslav Hasidism.16 Each of these four parts of the manuscript has its own clear title page. The fifth part of the manuscript, which follows Megillat Setarim, contains additional materials that do not have any title pages or prefatory headings. Among them is “The Story of the Shmasin (‘Slap’),” regarding the relationship between Rabbi Nachman and Rabbi Yudl of Dashev, and “The Story of the Plums,” a long story describing an erotic test that Rabbi Nachman experienced. This is followed by a copy of the will of Rabbi Asher Zelig of Teplik, the father of Rabbi Alter. The final page of the manuscript is written by Rabbi Alter’s son in

15 Author of Tovot Zikhronot, which records many Bratslav traditions that had not heretofore been published. Died 5715. See about him Yikra D’Chayei, pp. 162–163; Through Fire and Water, pp. 693–694. 16 See Mark, The Scroll of Secrets.



Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests 

 199

his own hand, lamenting the murder of his father in the course of a pogrom that took place in Teplik.17 Later on, I will discuss the placement of “The Story of the Plums” and who wrote it down. Before presenting “The Story of the Plums,” I will quote the opening of the discourse, “Ki Tavo BeKerem Rei’akhah” (Likutei Moharan I 257), to which the story relates: “When you enter your neighbor’s vineyard,” etc. (Deuteronomy 23:25). [This is] based on the episode, etc., that [Rabbi Nachman’s] mother gave him a directive that if he cannot abide someone, he should not allow that person to be with him. Otherwise, he will need assistance from those who are far regarding those who are close to him, etc. (And this will be explained elsewhere.) [This is] because when a person overeats, that food harms him…. And then it removes that person’s life-force, and as a result it harms the person….

The beginning of this discourse is cryptic. What is the story that was removed from the text, leaving only the word, “etc.”? And what is the connection between the incomprehensible directive that Rabbi Nachman’s mother left him–“if he cannot abide someone, he should not allow that person to be with him. Otherwise, he will need assistance from those who are far regarding those who are close to him”–and the discourse that addresses the harm caused by overeating? In the Ostroh edition of Likutei Moharan I, published in 5581, which was edited anew by Rabbi Natan,18 the phrase, “And this will be explained elsewhere,” is replaced with “See the end of the book, where this story is explained.” However, for whatever reason Rabbi Natan did not carry out his plan to add the story to the end of the book. In following editions, the language reverted to that of the first: “And this will be explained elsewhere.” It may therefore be understood why the reference to a mysterious episode at the beginning of this discourse aroused the curiosity of Rabbi Yitzchak Meir and why he attempted to learn what that story was from leading Bratslav Hasidim. As will be shown, the answer to this riddle is “The Story of the Plums,” recorded in the manuscript of Rabbi Alter Tepliker. Since this story is not well17 Regarding this manuscript and its various recensions, see ibid., pp. 38–46. Further on I will address this topic briefly. A photograph of the last page of the story quoted here appears in Appendix 3. 18 Although Rabbi Natan prepared the first edition of Likutei Moharan I for the printer, its publication was not under his supervision, and after the book came out he had complaints about how it had been edited. Regarding this, see Weiss, “Hakhanat Likutei Moharan Kama ledefus,” Mechkarim, pp. 257–277.

200 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

known and it describes a test that Rabbi Nachman underwent, I will quote it here in full. Connected to the essay, “Ki Tavo BeKerem Rei’ekhah,” etc. “[This is] based on the episode, etc., that his mother gave him a directive, etc.” (Likutei Moharan I 257). This discourse was delivered at the same time as the discourse, Likutei Moharan II 88: “One must be very careful not to eat an unripe fruit, etc.” And [Rabbi Nachman’s teaching and] revelation of these essays came about in accordance with an episode [that included] a directive that his holy mother gave him. And this is the story: After the marriage of the admor (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing), while he was still living in his father-in-law’s house, he used to travel every year with his wife, the rebbetzin, to Mezhibozh, to the house of his saintly father and mother, in order to perform the mitzvah of honoring one’s parents. And it is well-known that it was his holy practice to conceal and hide his great devotions– which was particularly the case in the days of his youth (and as is recorded in his holy talks). And although his wife knew of his holy devotions, he made her swear not to reveal them to anyone else. And so no one at that time knew of his devotions and holiness. Once when he came to Mezhibozh, to the house of his father and mother, all of his family and relatives came forth to greet him, as is customary. And among them a female relative came to greet his shining face. And because he hid and concealed himself greatly, so that no one would know of his toil in serving the Lord and of his holiness, he appeared to his family to be like other young men. And so when this woman saw his beauty, the evil inclination set alight her desire for him within her, until she brazenly said unto him, “Let us go and luxuriate in amorous embraces [(cf. Proverbs 7:18)].” But she immediately realized that she would not succeed in the slightest, and so she left him. When the holy admor heard her words, he was deeply shocked that he had been faced with such a test. And even though he had withstood the test, he immediately went outside and he commanded a man to hire a wagon to return immediately to his house. And so it was. And he told his saintly father and mother that he must go home immediately. And he traveled from there in haste. As for the above-mentioned woman, because of her great desire, she wished at any rate to feast her eyes on the sight of his face once more. And so when she saw that he was leaving, she ran after the wagon and cried out to him, “Behold, your mother is very weak right now, and she asked me to run after the wagon and bring you back to her house.” But he did not heed her, but he commanded [the wagon driver] to whip the horses and keep going. And he traveled from there and came to his home. And it was after these things had occurred that the holy admor again traveled to Mezhibozh to the house of his father and mother. And then his holy mother directed him as a formal



Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests 

 201

command, telling him that if he cannot abide someone, he should not allow that person to be with him. And if [that person does] not [go,] then [Rabbi Nachman] will need help from people far from him [in the sense that they are not his followers], in addition to those close to him. (That is to say that people far from him will help him so as not to allow a person whom he cannot abide to be near him, even if [the latter] is close to him–[here, “close” indicates a relative].) This woman had a younger brother, who had been three or four years old at the time that this incident had taken place. The holy admor saw him after a number of years had passed. [This occurred] when the holy admor was living in Bratslav and his holy name, righteousness and holiness were famous throughout the world. The above-mentioned woman regretted her evil deeds, and when she recalled what she had said to such a holy and awesome tzaddik, she was deeply ashamed. And she desired to appease the holy admor and have him assign her [a regimen of] penitence and rectification for this. Her above-mentioned brother was already grown at that time, more than 20 years old. She told him of the evil deed that she had committed, and she asked her brother to travel to Bratslav to the holy admor and appease him for her sake and receive [a regimen for] penitence. And so he did that, and he traveled to Bratslav. And when he came to the house of the holy admor, [the latter] recognized him immediately, even though he now had a beard. And before [the brother] began to speak to the holy admor to tell him why he had come to him, the holy admor (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing) said, “I cannot abide him in my house.” And [Rabbi Nachman’s] holy daughter Adel (may the memory of a holy woman be for a blessing) heard these words from his holy mouth. And she knew the command of his holy mother, mentioned above, and she very much wanted to throw [the brother] out of [Rabbi Nachman’s] house, but she was unable to do so. And the Lord, blessed be He, brought it about that at that time a man came from Nemirov to the house of the holy admor (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing). ([This man] was the brother of Rabbi Lippa of Nemirov.) [This] above-mentioned man from Nemirov was far from the holy admor, and not one of those close to him. And when he came to the house of the holy admor and he saw the man from Mezhibozh who was then in the house of the holy admor, [the admor’s] holy daughter signaled to the man from Nemirov that the holy admor cannot abide that above-mentioned [brother] and that he should eject him from the house of the holy admor. The man from Nemirov took hold of the man from Mezhibozh and threw him out. That above-mentioned man was famished at the time. And in the marketplace he saw a man standing selling a fruit called flamen (‘plums’). He bought a very large amount. And the fruits were not yet ripe. And the above-mentioned man took the fruits and with them entered the house of the holy admor into the outer room, where the holy admor was not present. And he ate too many of the fruits. And as soon as he ate, he grew very weak, and he commenced to cry out because all of his limbs were hurting him terribly, and [his] life was leaving him.

202 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

And the people from the marketplace heard and entered the room where he was, and they took him forth in order to bring him to his lodgings. But before they managed to bring him there, he died in the street. And after this episode, the holy admor delivered the discourse, “Ki Tavo BeKerem Rei’ekhah,” mentioned above, which states that when a person over-eats he can remove his own lifeforce. And at that time he also delivered the teaching, “One must be very careful not to eat an unripe fruit,” which explains that as a result of [doing] so, a person’s life-force leaves him. Afterwards, the holy admor (may the memory of a holy tzaddik be for a blessing) said that the death of that above mentioned-man in Bratslav was [both a rectification for himself and] also a rectification for his sister.19

The connection between “The Story of the Plums” and Likutei Moharan I 257 and Likutei Moharan II 88 apparently does not concern the bulk of the story, with its theme of being tested, but its conclusion, in which the brother dies as a result of overeating unripe plums. This episode inspired Rabbi Nachman to deliver a discourse that explains why overeating (Likutei Moharan I 257) and eating unripe fruits (Likutei Moharan II 88) are dangerous. These two discourses were delivered together as a response to the brother’s bizarre death. Only later, during the editorial process, was it divided into two, and published as such. (The reason that Likutei Moharan II 88 was not published in Likutei Moharan I together with Likutei Moharan I 257 is a topic in itself, which I discuss elsewhere. Here I will simply note that the reason is apparently connected to another part of this discourse that has to do with one of Rabbi Nachman’s visions, and whose visionary nature aroused uncertainty whether or not to include it in Likutei Moharan.20) What led Rabbi Nachman to deliver discourses on the harm caused by eating unripe fruits and overeating? There is nothing unusual in this topic per se, for Likutei Moharan contains many comments on biological and medical topics. However, it is possible that Rabbi Nachman had a special interest in explaining this medical phenomenon: and that was to forestall the impression that the death of the brother whose presence Rabbi Nachman could not abide resulted from any conjuration of Rabbi Nachman. It was important to Rabbi Nachman to explain

19 In Rabbi Alter Tepliker’s manuscript, there is no pagination. The story was published recently in Chayei Moharan in the section entitled “HaHashmatot, Sichot SheHayah Etzel Kol Torah” (80 [21]), pp. 92–94. The publishers apparently assumed that the story had originally been part of Chayei Moharan, and they therefore inserted it into Chayei Moharan. However, it appears to me that this assumption is problematic, and I will discuss this further on. 20 See on this Mark, “Seridei eish.”



Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests 

 203

that the brother’s death was natural, as well as that his death constituted a rectification or atonement for his sister’s sin.21 Before continuing to discuss the topic of tests, which is the focus of this chapter, I will devote a few words to question of who wrote down the story in the manuscript.

Regarding the manuscript containing “The Story of the Plums” and who wrote it down I claimed above that the story that Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman heard from Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz is the same as the story recorded in Rabbi Alter Tepliker’s manuscript. This claim fits in well with what is known of the peregrinations of that manuscript. According to the testimony of Rabbi Hirsch Leib Lipl22 (as documented in Uman, Kakh Nifratzah HaDerekh), after Rabbi Alter was murdered by pogromists in 5679, the manuscript remained in the hands of his son, Rabbi Shmuel Shmelke. He, as mentioned earlier, added words of dedication to his father on its final page. Rabbi Shmuel sold the manuscript for 50 rubles to the Hasid, Rabbi Hirsch Leib Lipl. When Rabbi Hirsch Leib Lipl decided to move to the land of Israel, he was afraid to take the manuscript with him, and so he left it with Rabbi Avraham 21 There may be a more intrinsic connection between the discourses and the story, for a connection exists between eating unripe fruits and rectifying the covenant. This connection is not sufficiently clear to me, and so I will only make some preliminary observations. The end of Likutei Moharan II 88, which discusses the danger of eating unripe fruit, quotes Rabbi Nachman as saying that this discourse and the one previous to it, Likutei Moharan II 87, which discusses the rectification of the covenant, together constitute a single unit. In a discussion by Rabbi Natan on Rabbi Nachman’s rectification for a nocturnal emission and to Rabbi Nachman’s advice on this subject, Rabbi Natan adds: “And [Rabbi Nachman’s] words imply that [such a blemish] corresponds to the blemish of King David, peace be upon him, [when he sinned] with Bathsheba, etc.” (Sipurei Ma’asiyot [“Sichot She’Achar Sipurei HaMa’asiyot”], p. 8). Regarding David’s sin with Bathsheba, Rabbi Nachman makes reference to the Talmudic statement that “Bathsheba, daughter of Eliam, was fit to be [the wife of] David, but he ‘ate her unripe’” (b. Sanhedrin 107a; Likutei Moharan I 72). That is to say, Rabbi Nachman utilizes the Talmud’s imagery of eating an unripe fruit in its description of David’s sin. Thus it is possible that there is an intrinsic connection between the tests in the erotic realm that are described in the story and the discourse that deals with the problematical nature of eating an unripe fruit. However, as stated earlier, the nature of this connection is not clear to me. 22 Rabbi Hirsch Leib Lipl died in 5740. See about him Uman, Kakh Nifratzah HaDerekh, pp. 151– 159; Cheshin, “Ratz ketzvi vegibor k’ari: perakim mishirat chayav shel hachasid nanilhav, Rebbe Tzvi Aryeh Lipl,” Matmonim 1, pp. 100–130.

204 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

Sternhartz. When Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz in turn moved to the land of Israel, he left it with Rabbi Michel Dorfman (later head of the Bratslav Yeshiva in Meah Shearim and chairman of the World Breslov Committee).23 It is therefore clear that the secret manuscript that contains “The Story of the Plums” was in the hands of Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz while he lived in Tcherin, before he moved to the land of Israel. And it is therefore reasonable to assume that Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz transmitted the story to Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman. Who wrote down “The Story of the Plums”? It would seem that, since the story appears in the booklet in Rabbi Alter Tepliker’s manuscript, Rabbi Alter wrote it down. He either copied the story from an earlier manuscript of Chayei Moharan or Sichot Haran or heard it orally and he was the first to commit it to writing. However, a number of points render these assumptions untenable. These points are as follows. 1. “The Story of the Plums” is not quoted in the second part of the manuscript, Sefer Hashmatot MiSefer Chayei Moharan but following the fourth part, containing Megillat Setarim, in the fifth part of the manuscript, which gathers together other materials that have no title page or heading to indicate what they are connected to. 2. Whereas the suppressed passages from Chayei Moharan and from Sichot Haran that appear in an earlier manuscript are introduced by a notation of their original placement in Chayei Moharan–i.e., what section of the book they originally came from–“The Story of the Shmasin” and “The Story of the Plums” have no such notation to mark an original placement. “The Story of the Plums” is noted as being relevant to the teachings from Likutei Moharan, but no link to Chayei Moharan or Sichot Haran is provided–no indication is given that it had been removed from either of these works. (Similarly, “The Story of the Shmasin” opens directly with “Once”–without reference to it having been originally part of any book at all.) In addition, this “Story of the Plums” does not appear in any of the manuscripts of Chayei Moharan and Sichot Haran extant, including those in which the suppressed portions have been restored.24 3. “The Story of the Shmasin,” which in the manuscript appears in proximity to “The Story of the Plums,” was published in Kokhavei Ohr (in the section entitled 23 Uman, Kach Nifratzah HaDerekh, pp. 100–101, 173. Regarding the later migrations of the manuscript, see Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 38–42. 24 The story does not appear either in manuscripts that preceded Rabbi Alter Tepliker’s transcription (e.g., the manuscripts of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias and Rabbi Naftali) nor in later manuscripts (e.g., Sefer Hashmatot MiChayei Moharan transcribed by Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman, the manuscript transcribed by Rabbi Shmerl of Berditchev and others).



Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests 

 205

“Anshei Moharan”), which was written by Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan and published by Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz.25 There too it is not described as an elision or quotation from Chayei Moharan or Sichot Haran, but as an oral tradition. 4. The style of “The Story of the Plums” is different in three ways from that of the stories that Rabbi Natan recorded. First, the story tends to be prolix, whereas Rabbi Natan tends to be succinct. 5. Second, the story contains a number of expressions in a scriptural style: “Let us go and luxuriate in amorous embraces”; “And it was after these things”; “he commanded”; “said unto him”–none of them common, and certainly none of them native to the language of Rabbi Natan, whether in Chayei Moharan or in any of his other writings. Such a concentration of expressions as these in one story indicates that they are the fruit of the pen of another author, one who flavored his writing with pseudo-biblical phrases in the style of Enlightenment literature. 6. Third, in the many books that Rabbi Natan wrote, the term “the holy admor” appears only a few times, whereas in “The Story of the Plums” it appears 20 times. All of these points lead to the conclusion that “The Story of the Plums” was never a part of Chayei Moharan or Sichot Haran, and that, more generally, it was not composed by Rabbi Natan of Nemirov.26 A few characteristics of the physical properties of the pages in the booklet in which “The Story of the Plums” and “The Story of the Shmasin” appear raise the possibility that these stories are not an original part of the booklet that Rabbi Alter Tepliker transcribed, but were appended by someone else. 1. The pages upon which “The Story of the Plums” and “The Story of the Shmasin” are written differ from the other manuscript pages. Whereas the other pages of the booklet are not lined horizontally, these pages have blue lines, like those of a composition book or ledger. In addition, these pages are narrower than the other 25 See “Anshei Moharan,” p. 28. The story was not included in the first edition, which was published by Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman. It first appeared in the edition published by Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz in Jerusalem in 5693. 26 If so, the publishers of the editions of Chayei Moharan Im HaHashmatot (Jerusalem 5760; Beit Shemesh 5785) erred in printing the story in Chayei Moharan (at the end of “Sichot,” which reports the conversations accompanying the discourses, at the end of passage 80 [21]) as a passage that had previously been removed, for the story had never been part of Chayei Moharan. It seems that the publishers relied on the photocopies of the manuscript of Rabbi Alter, for the story does not exist in other manuscripts of Chayei Moharan, and it was apparently written down only at the beginning of the twentieth century and after Rabbi Alter’s murder (as I will later on make clear).

206 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

pages in the book. It is possible that they were added to the original booklet. Evidently, at some point the binding of the booklet was repaired and reinforced with thread, so only with difficulty can one see the inner part of the pages. It is possible that when the booklet was rebound the lined pages were inserted (see photograph 7 in Appendix 3). 2. The handwriting on these pages is larger and more spacious than that in the rest of the manuscript. Although it bears a resemblance to the handwriting of Rabbi Alter, it is different. For instance, in these pages the letter alef is generally configured like two parallel lines, one of them slightly bent, whereas in the rest of the booklet the two lines of the letter alef are always connected. It may therefore be concluded that this part of the booklet was not transcribed or written by Rabbi Alter Tepliker but is a later addition. It is possible that the later addition begins on the page preceding the lined pages–that is to say, in the last column on the last page of Megillat Setarim. Possibly on this page the transcriber began adding text and then, since he ran out of room, he added pages that were not among those of Rabbi Alter’s original booklet.27 Who was the person who added the material, most of it on the inserted lined pages, to Rabbi Alter’s manuscript? I earlier cited the testimony of Rabbi Hirsch Leib Lipl that the manuscript was in the hands of Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz before he moved to the land of Israel, and I also cited Rabbi Natan Tzvi Koenig’s quotation from Kuntres HaNisyonot indicating that Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman heard the story from Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz. It might have been possible to conjecture that Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz knew the story from Rabbi Alter’s manuscript that Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz possessed (and perhaps from other sources as well), and he related it to Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman. However, now that it is clear that the story was added to Rabbi Alter’s manuscript and is not in his handwriting, the opposite possibility arises: that Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz heard the story orally and then wrote it down as an addition to Rabbi Alter’s manuscript. It is apt that he would have recorded it in this manuscript, one in which many esoteric Bratslav traditions are gathered. This conjecture relies as well on the knowledge that Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz was partial to the approach of his grandfather, Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, describing the events in the context of which Rabbi Nachman delivered his dis27 There are two additions on this page: a passage that describes a miraculous deed that Rabbi Nachman performed, connected to a passage in Sichot HaRan; and a list of dates of the deaths of students of Rabbi Nachman and Rabbi Natan. The document states that this list was copied from a list written down by Rabbi Natan.



Kuntres HaNisyonot: The Booklet of Tests 

 207

courses. In addition to the statement quoted above in which Rabbi Avraham Steinhartz mentions this approach of his grandfather, in Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz’s own books, Tovot Zichronot and Rinat Tzion, he relates the stories behind Rabbi Nachman’s discourses.28 Since other individuals who possessed the manuscript–i.e., Rabbi Alter’s son, Rabbi Hirsh Lipl, and Rabbi Michel Dorfman– apparently did not employ this approach, it seems reasonable to presume that Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz added this text. A comparison of the handwriting of this story with that in manuscripts known to have been written by Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz is inconclusive (see photograph 8 in Appendix 3). In Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz’s known handwriting, the two lines of the letter alef are at times connected and at times parallel–very similar to the handwriting in the lined pages. On the other hand, the letter lamed appears different. It is difficult for me to decide if the resemblance is sufficiently strong to say that it indicates the same writer at different times and situations or if it indicates two different writers.

Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Bender’s skepticism regarding this version of the story I will conclude by mentioning reservations attributed to Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Bender regarding the reliability of this version of the story. Rabbi Eliezer Cheshin told me that he heard the following narrative from a number of the students of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Bender. Rabbi Bender related that once when he traveled to Tcherin he heard Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman tell “The Story of the Plums.” Rabbi Bender said that when he heard the story he was seized with trembling, for it did not sit well with him at all. When he returned to Uman, he asked Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan about it, but the latter did not reply. Rabbi Levi Yitzchak then turned to other elder Hasidim in Uman and asked them about the story, and they answered that they had indeed heard it, and they told him a different version with which they were familiar. Rabbi Levi Yitzchak told his students that the story that they knew was imprecise. But despite their oft-repeated pleadings, he refused to tell them what was inexact, and what was the precise version of the story that he heard from the Hasidim in Uman.

28 Tovot Zichronot, Bnei Brak 5738; Rinat Tzion, Bnei Brak, 5735.

208 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

When speaking of the written story, Rabbi Levi Yitzchak would say, “This isn’t Rabbi Alter.” Perhaps with these words he was hinting that he did not think that Rabbi Alter had composed or transcribed the story. I do not know if this conversation of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak was ever written down. It appears to me that this rumored response of his expressed the sense that the story–and perhaps the entire topic of Rabbi Nachman undergoing tests–is, in the eyes of the Hasidim (as represented by one of their leaders, Rabbi Bender) so charged and volatile that it can arouse discomfort and even shock, and so people should either not tell such stories or at least diminish their impact. Having made these prefatory clarifications, I will now return to the story.

3 The tests “The Story of the Plums” reveals only a fraction of the tests that Rabbi Nachman underwent in his youth. The story illustrates the assertion that “in the midst of the days of his youth … he experienced many tremendous tests without number regarding this desire…. But he was strong and heroic, and he overcame his [evil] inclination.” The story also demonstrates that these tests involved not only the allure of sexual thoughts but the possibility of consummating sexual behavior. However, the story cannot serve as an example of other attributes ascribed to Rabbi Nachman: that he “desired tests” and that “he did not avoid another test.” In this story, Rabbi Nachman visited his parents and he had no way of knowing that one of his female relatives would attempt to seduce him in their home. Furthermore, following this attempt, Rabbi Nachman fled immediately, even though his sudden departure aroused astonishment. There is a distinct similarity between the test that Rabbi Nachman underwent and the test that the biblical Joseph experienced in Potiphar’s house in Egypt. Joseph was “a young Hebrew,”29 “fair in shape and fair in appearance,”30 who withstood the wiles of his master’s wife who was alone in the house with him and implored him unceasingly, “Lie with me.” In response, he “did not heed her”31 but “fled and went outside.”32 So too Rabbi Nachman was staying in the house of his parents, a “youth,”33 when a female relative “saw his beauty,” desired him, 29 Genesis 41:12. 30 Ibid. 39:6. 31 Ibid. 10. 32 Ibid. 12. 33 Rabbi Nachman married when he was about fourteen, and this incident occurred “after the marriage of the admor”; see Gidulei HaNachal, p. 1.



The tests 

 209

and told him, “Let us go and luxuriate in amorous embraces,” but he “withstood the test,” and he went out and fled to his home. There is reason to believe that this test played an important role in shaping Rabbi Nachman’s self-conception as a tzaddik34–in particular, as a tzaddik corresponding to Messiah son of Joseph35: a tzaddik who, like Joseph, overcame sexual temptation. By withstanding the test as had Joseph, a door was opened to Rabbi Nachman to attain the revelation of the Torah. As he describes in his discourse, “B’Karov Alai M’rei’im”: Before Joseph attained revelation of the Torah … and before he gained revelation of the Torah, he was forced to experience a test of refinement in [terms of] the general desire…. And as a result of passing the test and breaking the husk that precedes the fruit, he attained the fruit–i.e., the revelation of the Torah. That constitutes wisdom and understanding. As the verse states,36 [Pharaoh addressed Joseph with the words,] “There is no one as understanding and wise as you.”37

The parallel between these words about Joseph and “The Story of the Bread” is fascinating and significant. In “The Story of the Bread,” the protagonist must go through a stage of overcoming desires–in particular, the desire for eating, which is analogous to sexual desire–before he can eat the manna and receive the Torah. And the protagonist’s achievement is not only an understanding of the Torah but (as stated in “B’Karov Alai M’rei’im”) a “revelation of the Torah” that he attains as a result of having broken the general desire. “The Story of the Plums” demonstrates that Rabbi Nachman’s discourse regarding the breaking of sexual desire and his “Story of the Bread” (which he told in Zlatipolia about the “person tender in years” who, as a result of breaking his desire, attains the revelation of the Torah) are informed by an event in Rabbi Nachman’s life in which he had to overcome temptations and tests. That experience possibly established his perception of himself as someone who “was forced 34 Rabbi Nachman claimed that “the essential greatness of the tzaddik is in accordance with his holiness in regard to this [sexual] desire” (Chayei Moharan [“Avodat Hashem,” 601 (158)], p. 462). 35 The link between guarding the covenant and Joseph, and the link between these two and the trait called “tzaddik” is commonly expressed in kabbalistic and Hasidic literature. Joseph represents the trait of yesod, which corresponds to the place of the covenant, which is termed “tzaddik.” Rabbi Nachman uses these frameworks many times in his discourses, linking them with Messiah son of Joseph. Regarding this, see Green, Tormented Master, pp. 187–198. For more on Rabbi Nachman’s self-awareness as Messiah son of Joseph, see Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 123–128. And this will be addressed as well in coming chapters. 36 Genesis 41:39. 37 Likutei Moharan I 36:2.

210 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

to experience a test of refinement in [terms of] the general desire” and broke that desire, as a result of which he attained the revelation and giving of the Torah. The passages in Shivchei Haran on this topic tell that even after Rabbi Nachman underwent difficult tests, he continued to seek them out repeatedly–“and this happened many, many times, without number.”38 Presumably, Rabbi Nachman’s success in attaining the fruit–the revelation and giving of the Torah–after having broken desires and husks (as described at length in “The Story of the Bread”) led him to aspire to experience more tests, and thus to pray for them, viewing them as opportunities that would enable him to break other husks and attain greater purification, which would grant him more revelations and new fruits of the attainment of the Torah.

The way of tests Rabbi Nachman presents the summons to break desires as a challenge that each individual must face. He gives the example of the Hasid who cannot understand the words of his rebbe “if he has not first properly rectified the sign of the holy covenant.”39 Nevertheless, nothing indicates that Rabbi Nachman saw the approach of asking God for tests and not avoiding them as a model of legitimate religious service for others40–rather, it was meant for him alone, the path of the tzaddik. Therefore, whereas Rabbi Nachman demands that all of his Hasidim break their desires, he does not call upon them to pray for tests and he does not tell them to refrain from evading temptations, whether in the sexual arena or in any other. As far as I know, throughout all the generations of Bratslav Hasidism, no attempt has ever been made to emulate Rabbi Nachman’s behavior in the area of tests–to the contrary, Bratslav Hasidim have taken especial and even extreme measures to avoid them. Many parallels exist in broader Hasidic thought with Rabbi Nachman’s summons that a person not nullify or ignore his evil inclination but utilize it as he struggles to serve God. Also, Hasidic thought in general provides many parallels with Rabbi Nachman’s approach in differentiating between the service of

38 Shivchei Haran, 16, pp. 18–19. And see also Chayei Moharan HaMenukad (“Yegiato V’Tirchato B’Avodat Hashem,” 232–233 [3–4]), pp. 198–199; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 37–40; Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 59–69 (in the Hebrew edition only). 39 In the continuation of the discourse under discussion, Likutei Moharan I 38:5. 40 On various topics, Rabbi Nachman differentiated between the way of the tzaddik and the way of everyman. See for example Chayei Moharan (“Yegiato V’Tirchato B’Avodat Hashem,” 335 [6]), p. 254.



The tests 

 211

the tzaddik, who must raise foreign thoughts and redirect desire to the service of God, and the service of the regular man, who must avoid engaging with the evil inclination and not attempt to raise foreign thoughts.41 Nevertheless, it appears that Rabbi Nachman’s approach is uniquely far-reaching, beyond anything generally accepted in the Hasidic world. Commonly, Hasidism restricts the degree to which the tzaddik may enlist the help of the evil inclination, desires and foreign thoughts, limiting him to engage with temptations and tests that he encounters against his will. I have not seen any indication that the broader Hasidic world calls upon a tzaddik to purposely arouse desire and foreign thoughts in order to elevate them to the service of God, nor have I seen an indication of any Hasidic teaching that calls upon a tzaddik to purposely expose himself to actual tests–not even by asking God to send him more tests.42 Rabbi Nachman, on the other hand, desired tests and asked God to test him, and he did not refrain from placing himself in vulnerable situations–even when he had the ability to flee and avoid them.43 This constitutes a unique approach–one that, as far as I know, has no parallel in broader Hasidism.

41 Regarding various views in Hasidism dealing with the “the elevation of the service of the Lord by means of the evil inclination” and regarding the qualification that these devotions are intended for tzaddikim and great men only, see Piekarz, BImei Tzemichat HaChasidut, pp. 204–279. For more on this topic, see Idel, “Yofyah shel ishah.” 42 See Piekarz, ibid., pp. 265–268. 43 Such as his custom of staying in unfamiliar lodgings while wearing the clothes of “frivolous” people and in concealing his name and status and the like, as described above. Interestingly, Rabbi Nachman’s grandfather, Rabbi Nachman of Horodenka, also spoke about serving God with the help of the evil inclination, and he preached the effectiveness and spiritual profitability of contending with temptations. Thus, for example, Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye writes in his name: I heard from Moharan [“our teacher, the rabbi, Rabbi Nachman” (of Horodenka)]: …In every matter in which a person experiences opposition to his will by the evil inclination, goodness will come of it–for instance…. And so in regard to sexual immorality–from that which is palpable, he will grow wise in matters of consciousness, and from physical desire he will come to spiritual desire. Tzafnat Pa’aneach, p. 168 On the identification of “Moharan” in this passage with Rabbi Nachman of Horodenka, and regarding his over-all view regarding this issue, see Piekarz, BImei Tzemichat HaChasidut, pp. 260–265. Perhaps such a teaching constitutes another possible impetus to the claims against Rabbi Nachman: that he utilized such teachings that he received from his grandfather, Rabbi Nachman of Horodenka (Sichot Haran, 211, p. 254)–although words in a similar spirit were taught by many students of the Baal Shem Tov. However, a significant gap separates those teachings from Rabbi Nachman’s approach to praying for tests and not avoiding them.

212 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

Very interesting testimony outside of Bratslav sources regarding Rabbi Nachman’s approach of exposing himself to tests may be found in Beit Rebbe, a study of the figure and life of Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, the founder of Chabad Hasidim: We heard that one of the … grandsons of our rebbe, [Rabbi Schneur Zalman, reported] that at the time of the storm of controversy by the rabbis of Poland against the rabbi of Bratslav, [Rabbi Nachman,] our rebbe wanted to defend the honor of that above-mentioned rabbi, [Rabbi Nachman]. And he said furthermore that although the way of the rabbi, [Rabbi Nachman,] was to expose himself to tests, and that this is forbidden–because we pray, “And do not bring us to be tested, etc.”44–he was a very great man, a warrior in battle, etc.45

Clearly, Rabbi Nachman’s approach of exposing himself to tests was well-known. The characterization46 of Rabbi Nachman’s approach as something “forbidden,” something that stands in complete opposition to the prayer that a person must recite every day, “And do not bring us to be tested,” and the proximity of this characterization with the mention of the controversy against Rabbi Nachman, imply a link between the two. They imply that Rabbi Nachman’s way of exposing himself to tests constituted a focus of the controversy and of the harsh opposition to him and his path. This would also explain why Bratslav Hasidim concealed detailed descriptions of Rabbi Nachman’s approach to such tests, for any expansive depiction would be liable to increase the controversy and persecutions from which the Bratslav Hasidim suffered throughout the generations.47 Rabbi Nachman was aware of the problematic nature inherent in provoking the evil inclination, and he addressed this in a talk: [Rabbi Nachman] said: I used to request and pray a great deal that the Lord, be He blessed, test me, for I was resolute in my mind that unless I become insane–(but if a person is in his [right] mind, etc.).

44 From the prayer recited every morning after the morning blessings. See b. Berakhot 60b. 45 Heilman, Beit Rebbe, p. 66. Rabbi Natan Tzvi Koenig comments on this source; see Naveh Tzaddikim, p. 207. 46 The expression, “And he said furthermore,” may be understood to mean that after Rabbi Schneur Zalman spoke of the controversy, he spoke of Rabbi Nachman’s practice. Alternatively, this might be referring to “one of the … grandchildren of our rebbe.” Either way, this passage presents a non-Bratslav Hasid’s testimony regarding this approach of Rabbi Nachman and, apparently, the opposition that it engendered. 47 Regarding the disputes and persecutions that Rabbi Nachman and his Hasidim suffered, see Assaf, “Adayin lo nishkat hariv,” pp. 465–466 and note 1; Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 171–179.



The tests 

 213

[Rabbi Nachman] said: If it were not stated explicitly in the words of our rabbis, may their memory be for a blessing, specifically, “It is forbidden to say, ‘An arrow in the eye of Satan,’48 I would say, ‘An arrow in the eye of Satan.’ And I do not at all understand the stories told by our rabbis, may their memory be for a blessing, about Tannaim and Amoraim in whose eyes this desire was very difficult and challenging, as a number of Talmudic stories attest. [This is] because to me it is nothing, nothing whatsoever, and I do not even consider it a test at all. So certainly a secret exists in the statement in the Torah that this desire is a test, for in truth it is no test at all. And when a person who knows a little of the greatness of the Creator, be He blessed–as the verse states, ‘For I have known that the Lord is great’49 (‘I have known,’ precisely)–it is not considered a test at all. And there is no difference to me between male and female. I see the desire as [clearly as] I see you.”50

Rabbi Nachman knew that the passage in Kiddushin states unequivocally that a person may not stir up the evil inclination by saying, “An arrow in the eye of Satan.” The Talmud there narrates a series of incidents in which great individuals such as Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Akiva and Pelimo, said, “An arrow in the eye of Satan” or mocked sinners for their weakness, and who in the end themselves succumbed or came to the verge of succumbing to sin when at the last moment the evil inclination reprieved them.51 Rabbi Nachman makes the statement that if not for this Talmudic dictum, he would say, “An arrow in the eye of Satan.” Of course, this statement of Rabbi Nachman itself proclaims the equivalent of “An arrow in the eye of Satan”–particularly since Rabbi Nachman accompanies this by adding that he does not fear any test, and he engages in repeated prayers and requests that God put him to the test. Apparently Rabbi Nachman did not fear Satan–however, he did fear the Talmud to some degree, and therefore he did not literally proclaim “an arrow in the eye of Satan.” In Rabbi Nachman’s readiness to provoke Satan, even though the Talmud presents a series of stories about great sages, such as Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Akiva, who possessed an exaggerated self-confidence in their power to contend with the evil inclination and who failed, Rabbi Nachman places himself on a higher level than all of them. And Rabbi Nachman’s words that will be quoted below indicate that in this area he saw himself as having attained a level higher than anyone else.

48 b. Kiddushin 30a. 49 Psalms 135:5. 50 Chayei Moharan (“Yegiato V’Tirchato B’Avodat Hashem,” 232 [3]–233 [4]), pp. 252–253. Regarding Rabbi Nachman’s concept that intellect and mind nullify the test, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 66–69 (in the Hebrew edition only). 51 b. Kiddushin 81a–81b.

214 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

The following section of this book will discuss this perception of Rabbi Nachman about himself and what may be inferred from it.

From innovation in breaking the sexual desire to innovation in rectification of the sexual desire Chapter 4 quoted Rabbi Nachman’s boast that “he was exceedingly holy, great and awesome in this matter” of sexual desire, to the extent that he succeeded in eradicating it. Rabbi Nachman stated that in his eyes, there is no difference between male and female.52 I also quoted Rabbi Nachman’s statement that he had attained this high level in his youth, and he saw that as a unique achievement that distinguished him from all other tzaddikim: [Rabbi Nachman made the] boast that he is extraordinarily novel in regard to the breaking of desires: one cannot find that a person as tender in years as he is should so completely break all [of his] desires. [This is] because one can find a number of tzaddikim who left [their] desires behind, but they did not leave [them] entirely until they reached their old age. And he gave the example of a number of great tzaddikim, and he said that he knows that they did not leave [their] desires behind until they grew old. “But that a person tender in years such as myself, in the days of youth and childhood, should literally break all of [his] desires as much as I did–that is not at all to be found.53

Rabbi Nachman boasts that he is “extraordinarily novel” because, among all of the tzaddikim, someone else who broke his desires as he did at such a young age “is not at all to be found.” And in addition, Rabbi Nachman boasts of his wondrous innovation, his rectification for a nocturnal emission: “a wondrous innovation, for it is a very, very wondrous and awesome rectification…. And he said that this was not known since the day of the creation of the world.”54 Apparently, an inherent and causative connection exists between these boasts. A person who has become a great and unique innovation in the area of breaking desires and guarding the covenant is capable of innovating a new and wondrous rectification for those who have stumbled and blemished the cove52 And he boasted exceedingly of his great strength in breaking this desire. And he was exceedingly holy, great and awesome in this matter. And he said that he has no desire at all, and he said that for him male and female are equal–i.e., that he has no struggle because of any slightest passing thought when he sees or speaks with any woman, because everything is equal to him. Shivchei Haran, 16, pp. 18–19 53 Sichot HaRan, 171, p. 216. 54 Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 178–179.



Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan 

 215

nant. Rabbi Nachman–someone who had no equal since the day of the creation of the world–created a rectification that is unequalled. Similarly, it appears that a connection exists between the level that a person reaches in breaking his desires and the level that he attains “in the revelation of the Torah.” Since Rabbi Nachman broke his desire in a way that made him “extraordinarily novel,” without equal–someone else like him “is not found at all”–presumably the level that he attained in the revelation of the Torah too reaches an “extraordinarily novel” state of being, an absolute innovation that admits of no equal. There are thus two sets of correspondences – one, Rabbi Nachman’s self-awareness as a tzaddik who withstood all sexual temptations and his rectifications regarding the covenant and the general desire; and two, Rabbi Nachman’s unique breaking of his sexual desire and his unprecedented attainments in the revelation of the Torah. Later, these correspondences were developed by Bratslav Hasidism into a comprehensive conception of Rabbi Nachman as a tzaddik of all generations, and also were used to indicate the critical importance of the rectifications that he established for the redemption of the Jewish people and the world. Regarding this, I will examine in depth the conception of Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan regarding the tests that Rabbi Nachman sought to bring upon himself as a basic component in his unique greatness and in his role as tzaddik of the generations. I will be aided by various traditions related by Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan and others regarding Rabbi Nachman’s extraordinary attainments in the realm of guarding the covenant.

4 Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan on the link between Rabbi Nachman’s erotic tests and his unique, messianic status It appears to me that Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan wrote most clearly about this issue in his Biur HaLikutim (in his commentary on the discourse, “Retzitza” [Likutei Moharan I 27]). Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan’s words here express their meaning but appear to be out of order. The transcriber states that he collected the words “from scattered pages, and I do not know the order well, and it is possible that the beginning is missing–although, in my humble opinion, I believe that I arranged them correctly.”55 Before presenting the words of Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan, I wish to examine the passage from b. Sanhedrin that informs his words, which– 55 Biur HaLikutim, p. 102.

216 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

even more than the passage from Kiddushin that I quoted earlier–sharply critiques a person who invites tests. Rabbi Yehudah said in the name of Rav: A person should never seek to be tested, for David, king of Israel, sought to be tested, and he failed. [David] said to [God]: Master of the universe, why [in their prayers do people recite] the phrase, “God of Abraham, God of Isaac and God of Jacob,” but they do not say, “God of David”? [God] said: [These three] were tested before Me [and passed], whereas you were not tested before Me. [David] said to [God]: Master of the universe, try me and test me. (As the verse states, “Test me, Lord, and try me,” etc.56) [God] said: I will test you, and I will do something [special] for you, because I did not inform [the Patriarchs that I was going to test them], but I am informing you that I will test you in the sexual realm. Immediately, “And it was at the time of the evening, and David got up from his bed, etc…. And David sent messengers and took her and brought her to him and lay with her.”57 And that is the meaning of the verse: “You tested my heart, You searched by night, You purified me but did not find me [pure]. If I think (zamoti), let it not pass my mouth.”58 [That means]: [David] said: I wish that a muzzle (zemamah) had fallen upon my mouth [lit., “the mouth of my enemy”–a Talmudic euphemism], so as not to say such a thing. [Rashi (explains): Would that I had a bit upon my mouth, and it would have been possible for me to hold back my words, so that I would not have said this expression, “Test me.”]59

Commenting on this Talmudic passage, Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan asks why King David requested, “Test me,” since even when a person is not tested, the secrets of his heart are known to the Creator of the world. In particular, David thus made himself susceptible so that in fact he ultimately stumbled. And “from this [episode], our Sages (may their memory be for a blessing) learned that it is forbidden to request [tests], and that–to the contrary–a person should ask for [God’s] compassionate partnership, as above (‘And do not bring us to be tested’60).”61

56 Psalms 26:2. 57 II Samuel 11:2–4. 58 Psalms 17:3. 59 b. Sanhedrin 107a. 60 From the prayer that accompanies the morning blessings. 61 Biur HaLikutim, p. 102.



Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan 

 217

Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan does not answer his own question. But he uses it as a jumping-off point to discourse on Rabbi Nachman’s unique greatness: Taking all of the above into account, you may somewhat understand the nature of the unique tzaddik, who is the head of the leaders of [each] generation since the first [generation]–that he is elevated and totally beyond the entire remainder of the world, as indicated in the statement of our Sages (may their memory be for a blessing), as [mentioned] above. He is Moses-Messiah himself (who is unified with Rabbi Akiva, etc., as alluded to below), who seeks with a troubled mind throughout all his days: When will the greatest tests come to my hand? (And see Shivchei Haran, following Sipurei Ma’asiyot.62) [This is] because in the intense might and power with which he will withstand them, he will merit to rise with the vessel of the spirit of God in the beginning of [God’s] thought, to an attainment of His Divinity, may He be blessed (as [mentioned] above).63

Precisely due to the absolute contradiction between the approach of Rabbi Nachman and the clear statement of the Talmud that “a person should never seek to be tested”–a statement that is derived from the failure of David, king of Israel, who prayed, “Test me, Lord, and try me,” and who afterwards sinned with Bathsheba–Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan proposes the far-reaching concept that Rabbi Nachman is a greater tzaddik than all of the heads of the generations of all time and extraordinarily greater than all “the entire remainder of the world.” And therefore he and only he is permitted to and in fact expected to request, “Test me, Lord, and try me.” Rabbi Nachman is identified with “Moses-Messiah himself,” as well as with Rabbi Akiva, who (according to the well-known passage in b. Berakhot), would be troubled when reciting the verse, “And you shall love … with all your soul,” which alludes to the demand that a person undergo martyrdom if necessary, and pray that he might literally experience such martyrdom.64 Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan concludes by claiming that Rabbi Nachman’s unique approach to dealing with tests made it possible for him “to rise with the vessel of the spirit of God.” And with this, Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan links Rabbi Nachman’s greatness in serving God, derived from being tested, to his great attainments and Godly spirit. Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan continues his discourse, returning to Rabbi Nachman’s unique status:

62 Part of Sichot Haran and Shivchei Haran was initially published as an addendum to the first edition of Sipurei Ma’asiyot (Ostroh or Mohilev 5575). 63 Biur HaLikutim, p. 102. 64 b. Berakhot 61b.

218 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

[He was] a supernal wonder (as mentioned above). All of his service focused on Rosh Hashanah (and Rosh Chodesh), as mentioned above, to bring atonement…. It is precisely in this [area] that he is superior to all of the complete tzaddikim of all time, to the degree that there did not arise anyone else in Israel like [Rabbi Nachman] … to the degree that no other but he will “approach the cloud” [concealing] the voice of attainments [that come from God], be He blessed….65

Here Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan links Rabbi Nachman’s wondrous spiritual level (which he had described earlier) to his unique connection with Rosh Hashanah, the day of repentance and atonement. Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan thus links Rabbi Nachman’s uniqueness across the generations–beyond “the entire remainder of the world,” so that only he is permitted to expose himself to tests–with his unique connection to Rosh Hashanah–particularly the component of atonement–a component that is of course linked to Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications of sins. So closely was he linked to Rosh Hashanah “that he cautioned [his followers] to be with him on Rosh Hashanah… and he said that all of his being is Rosh Hashanah.”66 Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan paraphrases the verse, “There did not arise anyone else in Israel like Moses” (Deuteronomy 34:10) to proclaim that “there did not arise anyone else in Israel like [Rabbi Nachman].” These two statements do not contradict each other because, as Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan had stated earlier, Rabbi Nachman is himself Moses-Messiah. Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan adds that in the future as well no other like Rabbi Nachman will arise. “No one but [Rabbi Nachman] will ever approach the thick darkness, where the voice of the attainments [reached when reaching the Lord], blessed be He, [is concealed].” The logic of Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan’s interpretation leads to the conclusion that Rabbi Nachman’s uniqueness as a master of tests constitutes the basis both for his unique abilities in the realm of repentance and atonement (which is of course connected to the realm of his rectifications), and for his being the greatest tzaddik of all generations, so that there never was nor will there ever be anyone like him in regard to receiving the Torah that was given in the cloud and thick darkness on Sinai. This of course connects with Rabbi Nachman’s desire to receive the Torah from God Himself, and to his receiving the renewed Torah (as documented in “The Story of the Bread,” discussed in Chapter 2). Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan goes on to link Rabbi Nachman’s attainment of a unique level in rectifying the general desire with another realm in 65 Biur HaLikutim, p. 102. 66 Chayei Moharan (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 126 [23]), p. 165.



Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan 

 219

which he will function in a unique fashion: rectifying the entire world in order to prepare it for the complete redemption. Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan explains that although the tzaddik alone approaches the thick darkness where God is, “in this itself there is hope as well for the entire world.” And he goes on to explain how, with his dedication, the tzaddik brings rectification to all generations and for the entire world: Ever since the corruption of Adam, and all of the generations from then and until now, it is necessarily the case that even the greatest of the great must fully dedicate his soul and name67 until his spirit leaves–in that he literally dies. And precisely at that point he transforms the intensity of the trait of stern justice to the trait of compassion…. This gives hope as well to those who do not have the merit to attain this, because they nevertheless connect themselves, at any rate, to the essence of Joseph the tzaddik, [when he] passed away (as alluded to above). And the principal [reason] that the complete redemption did not occur then is that Joseph himself did not yet succeed in completely rectifying that which must be rectified in regard to the above-mentioned rectifications (as is understood from the interpretation of our Sages [may their memory be for a blessing] [of the verse,] “False is grace,” etc.68)…69 The rectification was still not complete (as [mentioned] above). And because of this itself– [and] because David too saw that he was not yet able to bring this completely about … because “singing” only applies to the [messianic] future, with the completion of the suffering of the bitterness of this extremely long exile, for “then he will sing” (Exodus 15:1) [is a reference to] is the one superior to them all (as [mentioned] above) … [who will] transform all 70 [impure] languages to a pure language…. And [utilizing those languages] in particular, he will clarify and explain well … all of the halakhot of the Torah, with peace and decisiveness…. Then all of the nations of the world will in the future … attain the wondrous Sabbath of peace ….70

Adam, Joseph and David did not succeed in completely rectifying the covenant. But “the one superior to them all” did succeed in doing so, and he will sing the complete song of the future. “The one superior to them all” alludes of course to Rabbi Nachman, of whom Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan writes in Kokhavei Ohr that “in him is realized the statement, ‘Many daughters have acted valiantly, but you are superior to them all’ (Proverbs 31:29).”71 And elsewhere Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi 67 I discuss Rabbi Nachman’s dedication and readiness to sacrifice his name at length in Chapter 8. 68 “‘False is grace’ (Proverbs 31:30)–that is [a reference to] Joseph” (b. Sanhedrin 20a). 69 Biur HaLikutim, p. 103. 70 Ibid. 71 Kokhavei Ohr (“Sichot VeSipurim”), p. 102.

220 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

Nachman Chazan points out that “[the numerical value of] these three words [in Hebrew], ‘superior to them all,’ is equal to the numerical value of [Rabbi Nachman’s] name spelled out fully: nun chet mem nun, [counting as well] the four letters and the whole word [as one].”72 It thus follows that Rabbi Nachman, who is superior to all of “the complete tzaddikim who ever lived,” will lead and realize the messianic revolution. “For then I will transform the nations to a pure language so that all of them will call out in the name of the Lord,”73 leading to wondrous peace among all of the nations. Rabbi Nachman’s unique approach regarding tests in the erotic realm was conceptualized by Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan as both a cause and effect of his being the “supernal wonder,” the tzaddik superior to all other tzaddikim throughout time–from Adam, through Joseph and David, until Moses-Messiah. Rabbi Nachman is the unique man to whom the dictum of the Talmud that “a person should never seek to be tested” does not apply. And as a result of the tests that he brings upon himself and overcomes, he attains levels that no one else has attained, and he gains rectifications of repentance and atonement that did not exist since the creation of the world. And he will sing the song of redemption of the future days. Rabbi Nachman’s unique and problematical approach to tests brought him to perfection in rectifying the covenant, so that he became the tzaddik “superior to them all” in the realm of revelation, rectification and messianism.74

More on Rabbi Nachman’s level of guarding the covenant, based on the manuscript, Sichot Mei’Anash The manuscript, Sichot Mei’Anash (‘Conversations of Our Hasidim’)75 relates extremely interesting material describing the complete perfection that Rabbi Nachman attained in guarding the covenant. This manuscript appears directly following Megillat Setarim in Sichot Mei’Anash, containing matters that the transcriber, a student of Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi

72 Kokhavei Ohr (“Chokhmah UVinah”), p. 548. 73 Zephaniah 3:9. 74 These words are of a piece with Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman’s overall view of the greatness and unique status of Rabbi Nachman as tzaddik of all generations and as being on the level of Messiah son of Joseph. See in particular Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman, Kokhavei Ohr (“Chokhmah UVinah”), pp. 101–102; ibid., Kokhavei Ohr (“Sichot VeSipurim”), pp. 122–130. 75 See regarding this Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 46–48.



Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan 

 221

Nachman Chazan, heard from him, written apparently at the beginning of the twentieth century. The following passage contains the words relevant to our topic. I heard Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman [Chazan] of Tulchyn say in the name of his father, who said in the name of Rabbi Natan …: Messiah son of Joseph will die before [Messiah son of David will come]. And our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) said, “Ich hab im gigebn agleikhn platz–‘I have prepared a fine place for [Messiah son of David].’” [This is] because our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) was Messiah son of Joseph, for he was pure in guarding the covenant with utter completeness. Our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) said that he did not understand this matter until, after a time, he rose to high levels and saw the level that the blemish reaches. And he wanted to nullify it entirely, but it is not possible to change nature…. Rabbi Nachman said that the Baal Shem Tov engaged in sexual relations two times, and that he experienced one nocturnal emission. And he had two children: his daughter Adel and his son Hirsh-Ber. [All of this is] because he required for his rectification “twice Scripture and once Targum.” [The halachah states that every week a person must read the weekly Torah portion twice and the Aramaic translation, the Targum, once. The Baal Shem Tov’s two children corresponded to the two readings of the portion. As for his nocturnal emission, it corresponded to the Targum. This is] because a nocturnal emission corresponds to the Targum (as is explained in Likutei [Moharan] I 19). But our rebbe partook of Jacob, the “beginning of my strength” (Genesis 49:3), in that he never experienced a nocturnal emission.76 Therefore, he was on the level of Joseph, [associated with] guarding the covenant. And the messiah needs to make use of [Rabbi Nachman’s] merit and reveal the truth in the world. Amen, quickly, in our days.77

These words clearly express the link between Rabbi Nachman having been “pure in guarding the covenant with utter completeness” and his ability to serve as Messiah son of Joseph. Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman uses the term, “with utter completeness” in his Biur HaLikutim to describe Rabbi Nachman’s level in this realm in relation to the tzaddikim who preceded him, such as Joseph and David: “Joseph himself did not yet succeed in rectifying [this] entirely,”78 and 76 “‘My might and the beginning of my strength’ (Genesis 49:3])–[this means] that [Jacob] never had a nocturnal emission” (b. Yevamot 77a). 77 For a fuller analysis of this passage in the manuscript Sichot Mei’Anash, see Mark, Appendix 4: “R. Avraham Chazan on the Scroll of Secrets: The Secret Mei’Anash Manuscript,” The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 285–294. 78 Biur HaLikutim, p. 103.

222 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

“David too saw that he was not yet able to bring this about completely.”79 As a result, there could not be a complete redemption in their days. This is in contrast to the tzaddik “superior to them all,” who attained perfection in this realm, as a result of which he is able to rectify that which no tzaddik before him could rectify. The basis of these assertions of Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan, as well as of the statement that Rabbi Nachman “wanted to nullify it entirely, but it is not possible to change nature,” is Rabbi Nachman’s statement in his conversation with Rabbi Naftali of Nemirov and Rabbi Aharon of Bratslav regarding his rectification for a nocturnal emission, as reported in part in Sichot Haran: And know that these ten chapters of psalms are very, very effective as a Rectification for a [Nocturnal] Emission. And they are a complete rectification and very, very effective…. And many great tzaddikim wanted to understand this and toiled to find this complete rectification. A few of them did not know at all what it consists of. A few of them began to know a little of the manner of this rectification, but they passed away in the middle of their work on it, and they did not finish it. But as for me, the Lord, be He blessed, helped [me] so that I succeeded in mastering this completely. And the manner of this rectification–by means of reciting the above-mentioned ten chapters of psalms–is a totally new matter, a wondrous innovation, for it is a very, very wondrous and awesome rectification…. (And [Rabbi Nachman] said that this was not known since the day of the creation of the world.) No doubt I would have wanted to nullify this [desire] entirely, but that is impossible, both physically and spiritually. Physically, it is impossible because one would have to nullify and change the nature of all human beings constantly, and that is impossible, for even Moses our teacher, peace be upon him, (like others similar [to him]), when he nullified nature did so only temporarily and [only] regarding a particular entity–such as the splitting of the Red Sea or the splitting of the Jordan and the like. That was only temporary. But [it is impossible] to nullify the nature of all human beings, for every individual must nullify and change his own nature. And in addition, it would be necessary to nullify and change nature always, and this matter is impossible. And in spirituality it is impossible as well, etc. But the ten chapters are a very wondrous and precious and effective matter.80

Rabbi Nachman’s statement that he succeeded “in mastering this completely,” something without precedent from the day of the creation of the world, appar79 Ibid. 80 Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 178–179.



Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan 

 223

ently refers to his rectification for a nocturnal emission. However, Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman Chazan sees this expression as describing Rabbi Nachman’s attainments in his personal struggle to guard the covenant. The link between these two matters is plausible. Moreover, that link is probable, in light of the parallel ways that Rabbi Nachman described the extraordinary level that he attained in breaking his sexual desire and the way in which he established the Rectification. Rabbi Nachman emphasized that each of these is a wondrous innovation without precedent, an innovation that the tzaddikim of previous generations attempted to attain but in vain, so that none of them reached the level that he reached in guarding the covenant and in establishing the rectification of the covenant.81 The contrast between the Baal Shem Tov’s sexual experiences and Rabbi Nachman’s level of sexual purity indicates what “utter completeness” refers to. This statement also indicates the close connection between Rabbi Nachman’s unique achievement in guarding the covenant and his unique achievement in establishing the rectification. Rabbi Nachman’s never having had a nocturnal emission has precedence in the figure of Jacob. However, it ranks Rabbi Nachman not only as superior to King David, who sinned with Bathsheba, but even as superior to Joseph, who–although he withstood the temptation of Potiphar’s wife so that he did not sin with her–experienced an emission in consequence of that temptation82; and clearly also as superior to the Baal Shem Tov, who experienced a single nocturnal emission in his life.83

81 On the topic of guarding the covenant, see Shivchei Haran and Sichot Haran, 171, p. 216. And on the topic of the rectification, see the passage quoted above from Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 178–179. 82 Cf. Sotah 36b and many sources in its spirit. These sources will be discussed more fully in the coming chapters. 83 It appears that the elevated trait of not experiencing a nocturnal emission relates solely to an emission that results from a lustful thought and not to an emission due to other causes, for the Baal Shem Tov himself said that “a person should not worry about an unclean occurrence, if he experienced an accidental emission” (Ohr Torah [“Parshat Re’eh”], pp. 85–86); and the Baal Shem Tov defined “accidental” as “he experienced an emission by accident–without any foreign thought and fantasy” (Maggid Devarav LeYa’akov, 160, p. 256). Furthermore, the Baal Shem Tov claimed that the latter type of emission is vital to a person’s existence, for if the seed would remain in him it might lead to his death (Ohr Torah, op. cit.). Rabbi Nachman too quotes the Talmud to the effect that “an emission is a good sign for a sick person … and so that is a favor for him” (Likutei Moharan II 117). And Rabbi Nachman does not regard as problematical the spilling of seed that does not come as the result of a lustful thought, in which instance a person does not require rectification, for “all [such cases are] nothing. ([Such a case] is comparable to a child urinating in [his] sleep).” The rectification is designated solely for an emission that results from a lustful thought (Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 177–178).

224 

 The Booklet of Tests and Rabbi Nachman’s Practice

Rabbi Nachman’s great level and extraordinary attainment were expressed in the fact that he never experienced a nocturnal emission–an attainment that resulted from purity of thought. Therefore, the important and new rectification that Rabbi Nachman founded with the power that he gained from this attainment, and to which he relates in his conversation with Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon, is the rectification for a nocturnal emission. Its purpose is to rectify the blemish of a particular type of emission and not all of the blemishes that a person experiences in the area of guarding the covenant, for Rabbi Nachman’s greatness lay particularly in this realm, in that he was so “pure in guarding the covenant with utter completeness” that he attained a level superior to that of King David and even superior to that of Joseph. The following chapter will deal with the additional part of the conversation quoted above between Rabbi Nachman and Rabbi Naftali, the part suppressed under Rabbi Nachman’s directive.

Chapter Six “The Story of the Armor”: More from the Bratslav Archives Containing Suppressed Texts 1 Introduction Chapter 4, which was dedicated to elucidating the formation of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, demonstrated that initially, in 5565, Rabbi Nachman counseled the recitation of ten chapters of psalms as a rectification for a nocturnal emission without specifying any particular psalms. Five years later, in 5570, in a conversation with Rabbi Naftali of Nemirov1 and Rabbi Aharon (the rabbi of Bratslav),2 Rabbi Nachman disclosed which ten specific psalms are to be recited in this rectification. He then told Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon “that they should tell and reveal this above-mentioned matter of these ten chapters of psalms to everyone.”3 Ever since then, Bratslav Hasidim have energetically devoted themselves to publishing and distributing this rectification.4 However, there was another part of that conversation, one that Rabbi Nachman cautioned should be kept secret and revealed only to select individuals. Firsthand testimony about this is recorded in Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan, which was published together with Yemei HaTla’ot (5693).5 This work quotes sections of the manuscript of Chayei Moharan that were internally suppressed and

This chapter is based on “‘The story of the armor’: more from the Bratslav archives containing suppressed texts.” Zion 70:2 (5765): pp. 191–216. [Hebrew] 1 Rabbi Naftali Vinberg of Nemirov (d. 5620) was a good friend of Rabbi Natan. When Rabbi Nachman moved to Bratslav, the two of them together became his acolytes. Rabbi Naftali became one of Rabbi Nachman’s closest Hasidim and his confidante as well, and as such was one of only two people to whom Rabbi Nachman revealed his Megillat Setarim Al Seder Biat HaGoel Tzedek. See Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 27–34. For more about him, see Gidulei HaNachal, p. 81. 2 Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 174–181. Rabbi Aharon (5535–5605) became a Hasid of Rabbi Nachman while the latter was still living in Medvedevka. At Rabbi Nachman’s request, Rabbi Aharon was appointed rabbi of Bratslav. Regarding him and the praises that Rabbi Nachman showered upon him, see Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 2, 264, p. 85; Gidulei HaNachal, p. 12. And see also Piekarz’s note on Weiss, Mechkarim, p. 209, end of note 33. 3 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 180. 4 See Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 252, and note 11 on p. 443; Assaf, Bibliogrofyah, pp. 11–13. 5 Yemei HaTla’ot (5693), pp.  188–200. The book proper has an appendix of talks recorded as “Ketav Yad HaRav MiTsheherin” (pp. 201–206). See above, Chapter 2, note 3.

226 

 “The Story of the Armor”

did not appear in the published version (5634).6 (And it quotes as well a few sections from Sichot Haran that were similarly internally suppressed.7) That testimony reads as follows: The topic of this story [that Rabbi Nachman told]: [It] is connected to [the passage] that was published in Sichot [Haran], 141, regarding the topic of the rectification for a nocturnal emission, which consists of reciting ten chapters of psalms. At that time, [Rabbi Nachman] also spoke with [Rabbis Naftali and Aharon and told a story]. He said that when people go to war they wear armor called pantzer, etc., etc. And he said that the topic of this “Story of the Armor” should be a secret, and they should only reveal it to select individuals. But they should tell and reveal the matter of the rectification of the ten chapters to everyone. And he said that this is a universal rectification. [That is] because every sin has its particular rectification, but this above-mentioned rectification (the [recitation of the] ten chapters [of psalms]) is a universal rectification, etc. (as is published there in the above-mentioned Sichot [Haran]).8

Academic circles have known of “The Story of the Armor,” and that it was closely guarded by Bratslav Hasidim, who did not permit access to it. Thus Joseph Weiss testifies: “I heard from a prominent Bratslaver, Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman (may his memory be for a blessing), in Jerusalem, that there exists an esoteric story that the Bratslav Hasidim call ‘The Story of the Armor.’”9 Weiss quotes the above passage from Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan and adds, “The connection between the rectification for a nocturnal emission and ‘The Story of the Armor’ is not clear. Does this esoteric story also involve a sexual blemish?”10 This secret story aroused the imagination of academics, who–not knowing its details–conjectured about its content and character. Judah Liebes argued that “‘The Story of the Armor’ … expresses on the one hand the war against Sabba6 Chayei Moharan was written by Rabbi Natan of Nemirov. Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin was the first to publish it, in an edition with notes that he added (Lemberg, 5634). Beginning with the second edition (Frampol, 5673), a small part of the suppressed material was restored, and notes and corrections were added. Regarding this, see Naveh Tzaddikim, pp. 75–77. 7 Sichot Haran was written by Rabbi Natan, and the first edition was printed in 5776. Regarding the various editions of the book and changes to its name, see Naveh Tzaddikim, pp. 73–74. Some of the elisions that were restored in the omnibus Yemei HaTla’ot were published afterwards in the edition of Chayei Moharan HaMenukad. However, the material related to “The Story of the Armor” remained unpublished. 8 Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot [5693]), p. 193. 9 Weiss, Mechkarim, p. 191. 10 Weiss, ibid.; Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 444, note 113.

Introduction 

 227

tianism and on the other hand it draws upon the terminology that the Sabbatians used in describing the messianic rectification that they wished to bring about in the year 5426.”11 Liebes writes: “When people go to war, they wear armor called pantzer.” In my opinion, this war refers specifically to the war against the Frankists–for, as mentioned earlier, Rabbi Nachman testified that the Baal Shem Tov received two holes in his heart because of the sin of the Frankists, as a result of which he passed away. Had the Baal Shem Tov known of the universal rectification that is here represented by the armor, he would have worn the armor on his body, which would have protected his heart, so that he would not have sustained the two holes, and he would have succeeded in his mission, the mission of “sweetening” the words of the Sabbatians.12

This speculation regarding the content and meaning of “The Story of the Armor” is part of Liebes’s general contention that “like most of the esoteric allusions in Bratslav literature, the hidden meaning of the universal rectification too is messianic … first and foremost directed … to the rectification of the nation’s sin of sins: the Sabbatian sin.”13 In a detailed and persuasive essay, Yehoshua Mondshine rejects Liebes’s skein of speculations regarding the part that Sabbatianism played in Rabbi Nachman’s world, including his attempt to link “The Story of the Armor” to Sabbatianism. According to Mondshine, “The war that Rabbi Nachman and his students were looking at was none other than the war against the evil inclination, which shoots its arrows at a person in order to induce him to sin.”14 In addition to addressing the sources that Liebes discusses, Mondshine quotes another part of this secret story, based on material contained in a letter that Rabbi Eliezer Shlomo Schick sent to one of his Hasidim15: Regarding your question about “The Story of the Armor,” which our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) told when he revealed the topic of the universal rectification, much material exists. I will write to you briefly that [the idea is as follows]:

11 Liebes, ibid., p. 254. 12 Ibid., p. 275. 13 Ibid., pp. 253–254. 14 Mondshine, “Al ‘Hatikun haklali,’” p. 214. 15 Rabbi Eliezer Schick is a prolific Bratslav writer and leader of a large group of Bratslav Hasidim, most of them baalei teshuvah, who divides his time between New York and Yavne’el. Regarding him, see Piekarz, “Neo-Breslaviyut,” Chasidut Breslav, pp. 199–218. Chapter 9 will discuss his faction of Bratslav Hasidism.

228 

 “The Story of the Armor”

When people go to war, they put on armor. And then even [sic] when a person is wearing armor, he is saved because of the armor, because the arrows [shot at him strike the armor and] fall down. And even if [enemies] break the armor and kill him, he is also saved, etc. And [as] from a great distance [we may see] a very awesome and wondrous secret in this: for when a person merits to recite these ten psalms that are the universal rectification, he is like a person clothed in armor called pantzer. [And] then no arrows can pierce him because of the armor, the pantzer. That is to say, even if he has already sinned, heaven forbid, [the arrow] will not enter his soul because of the barrier of the armor that is so efficacious, these ten psalms that are so wondrous that they save a person from eternal death, for he can be reincarnated, etc. And there are other matters involved [in this as well]. But because “the secret of the Lord is to those who fear Him” (Psalms 25:14), it is forbidden to write them down.16

Mondshine argues that just as the part of the story revealed by Rabbi Schick makes no mention of Sabbatianism, so too the other, as yet unrevealed, parts of the story have no connection to Sabbatianism. The esotericism is not due to any fear of revealing that the universal rectification and the story have a link to Sabbatianism–for no such link exists. Mondshine denies a desire to hide anything unseemly, for there is nothing unseemly. Rather, the impetus behind the concealment of the story is the desire not to reveal the power of the universal rectification, out of a concern that if people would realize the ease with which they could gain rectification, they would be lenient about spilling seed in vain, in which case the rectification would have done more harm than good. According to Mondshine, this esotericism is similar to the judgment of the Talmudic sages that certain laws “may not be stated before the unlearned.”17 In 5760, Bratslav Hasidim of the faction of Rabbi Israel Ber Odesser published an edition of Chayei Moharan that includes in the body of the text most of the material that had previously been suppressed, “except for ‘The Story of the Bread,’ ‘The Story of the Armor’ and Megillat Setarim. These we did not print. And that is in keeping with the instructions of admor (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing) to [his Hasidim] to keep these secret.”18 This edition of Chayei Moharan includes the passage, quoted above, that reveals the existence of “The Story of the Armor” (in “Nesiyato VIshivato B’Umin,” 225). An introductory note to this passage states that “the story itself is long and

16 Asher BaNachal, Volume 6, p. 138; Mondshine, “Al ‘Hatikun haklali,’” p. 214. For more, see P’ulat HaTzaddik (Jerusalem), 897, pp. 588–590, and also pp. 733–734. 17 b. Nedarim 49a: Mondshine, “Al ‘Hatikun haklali,’” p. 214. 18 Chayei Moharan Im HaHashmatot (“Mavo”) (5760).

Introduction 

 229

forbidden to be published. Here is only a brief overview, regarding which there is no prohibition.”19 But surprisingly, “The Story of the Armor” does appear in this edition, although elsewhere–in “Nesiyato LeNavritsh,” 162–with neither introductory note nor heading.20 Possibly, this contradiction represents a tension between the desire to publish the story and the impetus to cloud the fact that in so doing the publishers are revealing that which Rabbi Nachman had wished to remain hidden.21 It is also possible–so blatant is the contradiction between the statement that this story is not being published (in the introductory note) and the fact that it is published (in “Nesiyato LeNavritsh,” 162)–that there was some confusion among the editors.22 At any rate, if the version of the story published here is indeed complete, this contradiction is astonishing. Alternatively, perhaps this version is incomplete or altered, in order to conform to “the instructions of admor” that it is “forbidden to be published.” These questions have received their answer, for various manuscripts that contain the story and the context in which it is embedded have become available. With their assistance, it is possible to determine that after about 200 years in which the story was kept in the archives of suppressed Bratslav materials, during which time its content was shrouded in thick darkness, the story is now known clearly, and it is possible to clarify its content and the nature of its connection to the rectification for a nocturnal emission. I will now proceed to discuss the manuscripts in which the story appears, then present the story itself, and finally discuss its meaning and context.

19 Ibid., p. 248. 20 Ibid., pp. 194–195. 21 I discuss possible reasons for the secrecy imposed on “The Story of the Armor” in the final section of this chapter. For more on the nature and function of Rabbi Nachman’s secrets, see Chapter 2. 22 The story seems to be placed out of order in two ways. First, it does not appear together with the previously suppressed passage that testifies to its existence. Secondly, it does not appear in the proper chronological sequence. Rabbi Nachman told the story in Uman in 5770, about four years after his journey to Novorich in 5567–yet here it is placed together with his journey to Novorich. These dislocations may be ways of camouflaging the publication of the story. Alternatively, the placement of the story in the book and its very publication may be due to an errant editorial decision.

230 

 “The Story of the Armor”

2 Manuscripts “The Story of the Armor” appears in a number of Bratslav manuscripts. Here I will mention the most important of them. 1. Chayei Moharan, manuscript of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias (Jerusalem, Schocken Library 16988). It was previously in the hands of Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz. 2. Sefer Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan, transcribed by Rabbi Alter Tepliker in 5658 (1898). Rabbi Alter was the right-hand man of Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, who published both Chayei Moharan and Yemei Moharanat. 3. “Pinkas DeChasidei Breslav,” transcribed and original writings, arranged by Rabbi Shmerl of Berditchev in 5676 (1915). The manuscript now resides in the Vernadsky Central, Scientific Library of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kiev, archive 21, number 11/(5), pp. 10–14. 4. Sefer Chayei Moharan, transcribed by Korman (Jerusalem, Schocken Foundation 14284). This copy contains passages removed from Chayei Moharan restored by Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman (died 5727). The version of the story presented below is based principally on the earliest manuscript extant–that of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias–taking note of significant additions and changes that appear in other manuscripts. Thus I quote the passages in the Tepliker manuscript that precede and follow the story. To distinguish them, these two bracketing passages are not as fully indented as the rest of the text.

3 “The Story of the Armor” (Relevant to the book, Sichot Haran, following the stories [in] passage 141–[particularly,] the narrative [telling] how the rectification of the ten chapters of psalms for a nocturnal emission, may the Merciful One protect us, was revealed. And [the author] wrote there: “And these are the ten chapters of psalms: 16, 32, 41, 42, 59, 77, 90, 105, 137, 150. And one should recite them in the order that they are written in Psalms.” [A part of the narrative] is missing there [in the published text] and [the following] is how it should [appear].)23 [Rabbi Nachman] spoke with them more at that time. And he said that when people go to war they wear armor called pantzir. And nevertheless, if they are being shot24 at, and [the enemies] aim at the place where the armor does not

23 This introductory passage appears in Rabbi Alter Tepliker’s manuscript. 24 “Morim” in the manuscript of Rabbi Shmerl of Berditchev. In modern Hebrew, yorim.



“The Story of the Armor” 

 231

reach–for the armor does not encompass the entire body–and if they aim at a place where the armor does not reach, or if they shoot25 very strongly, they will break the armor itself. Then they will certainly kill [the person]. But how does one make armor26 so that [even] if [the enemy] kills [a person] he will live again,27 and if they kill him again he will come back to life? The rabbi28 spoke up and said that this corresponds to the mitzvah of levirate marriage. And [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) nodded his head to him [in affirmation]. [This is] because in levirate marriage the deceased [husband] returns to life by means of the levirate marriage, for “his wife has become his mother,” as is written in the holy Zohar, [for] he comes back to the world [as her son], as is known. But [what is] the [concept] of this matter, and [nowadays] how [does one] accomplish this [effect brought about by a levirate marriage,] since actual levirate marriage is not performed nowadays, and [yet] one needs to accomplish [its effect] on its level in its root, etc., etc.29? And he said that this is an insight. That is to say, it is an insight that is one of his awesome insights. And he said, “Such matters and such language were not heard since the day of the creation of heaven and earth.” And he said that there is someone who makes a wondrous vessel, and [when] someone [else] can imitate him and make it, that is also an innovation. But this [original] matter is such a wondrous innovation that even30 such language was not heard since the day of the creation of the world (as [mentioned] above). Also,31 he said at that time that the matter of this “Story of the Armor” should be a secret and they should only reveal it to select individuals.

25 Rovim. In this context, this means shooting arrows (like the previously-used synonym, morim), as in the verses, “shooting (roveh) [from] the bow” (Genesis 21:21), and “the archers … shot (verobu)” (ibid. 49:23). 26 “Armor” does not exist in the Korman manuscript. 27 “Again” in the Korman manuscript. 28 The Korman manuscript has the following reading: “The rabbi, our teacher and rabbi, Aharon (may his memory be for a blessing), who was standing before him at the time….” 29 In the Tepliker manuscript, “etc., etc.” does not appear. 30 The passage, “And he said that there is someone who makes a wondrous vessel, and [when] someone [else] can imitate him and make it, that is also an innovation. But this [original] matter is such a wondrous innovation that even,” does not appear in the Tepliker manuscript. 31 The Tepliker manuscript reads as follows: “…the world. And he said that this is the universal rectification. [That is] because every sin has its special rectification. But the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his gravesite–is the universal rectification. Also….” The Shmerl of Berditchev manuscript reads as follows: “…the world (as [mentioned] above). And he said that it is the universal rectification. [That is] because every sin has its special rectifica-

232 

 “The Story of the Armor”

But they should tell and reveal the matter of the above-mentioned rectification of these ten chapters of psalms to everyone. And he said, “Although it is an easy thing to recite,” etc.–as is published there in Sichot Haran, passage 141. (See there.)32

4 About the story “The Story of the Armor” is not long, consisting as it does of a few brief lines. In fact, it is not a story at all in the customary sense. It has neither a plot nor characters. It presents a question that opens with the description of a hypothetical incident–“if … and if … or if”–which serves as a background to the question, “But how does one make…?” The application of the term “story” to these words of Rabbi Nachman may be understood as not necessarily referring to a literary construct but bearing the sense of a description of some sort of development. The possibility that these manuscripts contain only a part of the story, as a result of which its literary character is obscured, does not appear reasonable to me, for a number of reasons: 1. Bratslav Hasidic texts customarily indicate an elision with the word “etc.”33 In this text, “etc.” appears only once–at its conclusion, in Rabbi Nachman’s response to Rabbi Aharon. And the placement there is natural and self-evident, giving no reason to interpret it as a sign of a passage removed due to internal censorship. 2. The story flows in a connected manner, without any gaps that might indicate elisions due to censorship. 3. As will be discussed further on, the meaning of the story is quite coherent, and there is no indication that any components or stages are missing. 4. The manuscripts that contain this text were never intended to be published but were meant solely for the use of their owners and the small coterie of Hasidim privy to the secret. Thus, writing down the text did not involve any tension due to Rabbi Nachman’s directive not to make the story known. The story was not tion. But the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his gravesite and to recite the ten chapters of psalms there–is the universal rectification. Also….” 32 This paragraph appears in the Tepliker manuscript following the words, “from the day of the creation of the world (as [mentioned] above).” 33 See Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 189–190; Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 12–14; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 8–9.



On the semantic field 

 233

recorded with the intent of having it published or spread orally but solely in order to hand it down from generation to generation for a select few whose knowledge of the text Rabbi Nachman approved. 5. The story appears in its present form not in a solitary manuscript but in a group of manuscripts, in all of which “The Story of the Armor” is presented in this form without any additions or even hint of the existence of an additional section. These manuscripts contain the most secret Bratslav Hasidic texts, such as “The Story of the Bread” and Megillat Setarim, and it is unreasonable to suppose that precisely this story was subject to censorship on top of censorship–that in a secret manuscript containing the suppressed texts, a text is presented still partially suppressed. All of these considerations support the view that the text as it here appears is complete. And as long as new findings do not come to light, there is no reason to conjecture that there are any additional sections of this story cached within the Bratslav archives.

5 On the semantic field: what is the link between the armor and a nocturnal emission? “The Story of the Armor” takes place entirely in the framework of the semantic field of the world of war. In the story itself, there is no divergence outside of this field. Only the extra-narrative context about the rectification for a nocturnal emission and Rabbi Aharon’s comment about levirate marriage raise the question: What is the connection that links the topic of war, armor, arrows and death with the topic of the nocturnal emission? Also, Rabbi Nachman’s own question within the context of the story itself–on how it is possible to restore a dead person to life–is surprising. Where in this story is it assumed that such a thing is possible and that the only question is regarding the method in which it is achieved? One would have expected that the answer is simply that that reviving the dead is not possible, for “all who come to it will not return” (Proverbs 2:19). Since this question makes no sense within the confines of the story, it impels us to seek the meaning of the story in its relationship to the extra-narrative world. The first step in doing so is to integrate the story into its context, to see it as part of the conversation on the topic of the rectification for a nocturnal emission. Therefore I return to the question: what is the connection between a nocturnal emission and the military semantic field that characterizes this story?

234 

 “The Story of the Armor”

Bow, arrows, target, sword There are ancient precedents in Jewish culture for the use of imagery from the world of war–in particular, shooting arrows–to describe the world of eros. In particular, shooting arrows commonly represent ejaculation and the spilling of seed in vain.34 One formative source in this regard comes from Jacob’s blessing of his son Joseph: (22) A fruitful son is Joseph, a fruitful vine along the well, with branches running over the wall. (23) The archers embittered him and shot and hated him. (24) But his bow was firm, and the arms of his hands were bedecked with gold. This was from the Mighty One of Jacob, and from then on, he became a shepherd, a builder of Israel.35 The Talmudic sages interpret the first verse as describing the beauty of Joseph, which aroused the daughters of Egypt to stride forth in order to gaze upon him. (According to this interpretation, the verse should be translated as, “A handsome son is Joseph, a son handsome to the eye; young girls strode out on the wall [to see him].”36) The Talmudic sages interpret the next verses in light of the episode in which Potiphar’s wife attempted to seduce Joseph. Joseph succeeded in constraining himself, so that “immediately ‘his bow was firm’–meaning, Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Meir, that he strengthened himself [and overcame his urge]. Nevertheless, ‘And the arms [zir’ei] of his hands were bedecked [vayafozu] with gold’–[this means that] he thrust his hands into the ground [in order to distract himself with pain,] but his semen [zera] issued [paz] from his fingernails.”37 This interpretation, which sees in the bow a representation of the male organ, is an important component in the fabric of imagery taken from the semantic field of war, and is utilized in the erotic discourse of the Talmud, the midrash, and, especially, in kabbalistic literature. The analogy between the organ of the covenant and the bow implies an analogy between the semen and the arrow. And indeed, “[The male organ] is called a ‘bow’ in that the seed shoots forth [from it]

34 Liebes has justifiably quoted passages written by Rabbi Natan that connect the arrows with semen: Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” pp. 255–257. 35 Genesis 49:22–24. 36 See Rashi there. 37 b. Sotah 36b.



On the semantic field 

 235

like an arrow.”38 In the continuation of this imagery, the woman is analogous to the target of the arrows.39 The sword too can represent the organ of the covenant. Various verses that mention the sword are interpreted as alluding to the organ of the covenant.40 The use of these images is widespread in kabbalistic literature41 and may be found in Rabbi Nachman’s homiletic writings in a number of places,42 among them in “Hai Gavra D’Azeil,” which discusses the rectification of the covenant and the universal rectification.43 The militaristic imagery exists not only in descriptions of eroticism itself–of sexual organs and sexual activity–but also in the framework of the broader discourse that addresses matters connected to eroticism. Those who guard the covenant attain the ability to use the sword and bow, as taught in Likutei Moharan: The essential weapon of the messiah is prayer…. As the verse states, “With my sword and with my bow”44–and Rashi explains [this to mean], “prayer and beseeching.”… And a person must receive this weapon via the level of Joseph–i.e., [via] guarding the covenant. As the verse states, “Gird your sword on your thigh”45 … which depends on [a person] guarding the covenant. And whoever attains this sword must know how to fight with the sword–not to turn it to the right or to the left but split the hair [of the target] and not veer off-course.46

38 Rashi on Genesis 49:26. For some examples of this imagery, see b. Chagigah 15a and Nidah 43a. The image of the organ of the covenant as a bow is bolstered by the verses in Genesis (9:8–17) that describe the bow as a sign of the covenant between man and God. 39 “A man needs caution in regard to the ‘sign of the covenant,’ so as not to fantasize and not to destroy … not to ‘draw the bow’–[meaning,] not to cause himself to have an erection in any way unless he is in the presence of the appropriate target, which is his wife when she is ritually pure” (Shenei Luchot HaBrit [“B’Asarah Ma’amarot: HaMa’amar HaShevi’i”], p. 40b). For another example, see Likutei Torah (“Parshat Ki Tavo”), p. 279. 40 “‘Each man with his sword on his thigh’ (Song of Songs 3:8)–that is [a reference to] the [organ of] circumcision” (Yalkut Shimoni [“Shir Hashirim,” 986]). And see Rashi on Genesis 24:2. And the Zohar provides a similar interpretation of the verse, “Gird your sword on your thigh, O warrior” (Psalms 45:4); Zohar, Part 1 (“Parshat BeShalach”), p. 61a. 41 For example: Zohar, Part 1, (“Noach”), p. 71b; Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69), 99a; ibid. (Tikun 69) , 110a; Pardes Rimonim, Part 2, Gate 23, Chapter 2, p. 10b; ibid., Chapter 19, p. 39a; Tomer Devorah, Chapter 8, p. 37; Sefer HaLikutim (“Parshat Nitzavim”), p. 323; Likutei Torah (“Parshat Ki Tavo”), p. 279; Reishit Chokhmah, Part 2 (“Sha’ar HaKedushah”), Chapter 17, pp. 917–918. 42 Likutei Moharan I 20:10; ibid., II 83. 43 Likutei Moharan I 29:4, 6. 44 Genesis 48:22. 45 The Talmudic sages interpret the thigh as alluding to circumcision and to the covenant of circumcision. See above, note 40. 46 Likutei Moharan I 2:2–3.

236 

 “The Story of the Armor”

The sword and the bow, which represent the organ of the covenant, also represent the ability of a person who guards the covenant to engage in battle. For our purposes, another development of this cluster of images is germane: the sword takes vengeance and wounds a person who blemishes the covenant. Thus, the Zohar interprets the verse, “I will bring upon you a sword of vengeance, avenging the covenant,” as meaning that the sword takes vengeance upon a person who blemishes the covenant.47 This interpretation is apparently the basis of Rabbi Nachman’s words, “The sword comes in response to a blemish of the covenant, corresponding to ‘a sword of vengeance,’ etc.”48

The need for armor, and the limits of its usefulness A man who destroys his seed in vain blemishes the covenant and improperly uses his sword and bow. In so doing, he is liable to compromise his well-being, even fatally so, in two areas. First, the blemish of the covenant arouses the sword of vengeance against himself, which can be fatal. As Rabbi Yochanan states, “Whoever spills seed in vain is deserving of death.”49 And second, this damage is a decree of death against his children–i.e., those children who might have been created from the seed that is now destroyed, which, instead of being a kernel of holy life, has been delivered into the power of the husks.50 The nocturnal emission is distinct from all other blemishes of the covenant in that it occurs during sleep, when a person is unconscious and not in full control of himself, so that it is difficult for him to prevent the occurrence. In his Reishit Chokhmah, Rabbi Eliyahu de Vidas writes that “there is almost no one in our generation who is saved from [a nocturnal emission].”51 Rabbi Nachman’s estimation of the dimensions of this phenomenon is a little more optimistic. He writes that “without a doubt, three [fourths] of the world have been caught by this known matter (i.e., a nocturnal emission, heaven forbid).”52

47 Leviticus 26:25. Regarding the sword of vengeance as harming the sign of the covenant, see, e.g., Zohar, Part 1 (“Parshat BeShelach”), p. 61a; ibid., Part 2 (“Parshat Va’Eira”), p. 26a. 48 Likutei Moharan I 20:9. 49 b. Nidah 13a. 50 Regarding the wasteful spilling of semen as equivalent to delivering it into the power of the husk of Lilith, see Likutei Moharan I 205. 51 Reishit Chokhmah, Part 2 (“Sha’ar HaKedushah”), Chapter 17, p. 899. 52 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 177.



On the semantic field 

 237

The extent of the phenomenon of the nocturnal emission and the difficulty in contending with it aroused the need to see to it that a person who goes to war– in the sense that “the verse, ‘When you go out to war against your enemies…’ (Deuteronomy 21:10) refers to a war against the evil inclination”53–should be able to gird himself in armor that will protect him from the sword and bow, which can injure and even kill. And indeed, from the time of the Talmudic writings to contemporary Torah literature of moral instruction, there is an untiring search for ways to prevent a person from sinning by spilling seed in vain. The totality of rules and guidelines for personal behavior–for instance, the prohibition against lying supine54 or against holding the male organ55–has been created with the goal of preventing a nocturnal emission and expending seed in vain. Rabbi Nachman does not disagree that wearing this armor of behaviors and prohibitions can help, but he argues that its protection is partial and local. There are places “where the armor does not reach,” and at times the arrows are shot with such strength “that they break the armor itself.” Therefore, even if a person goes out to battle girded in armor, he is liable to be harmed and even killed by the avenging sword or arrows.

“But how does one make (armor) that [even] if [the enemy] kills [a person] he will live again, and if they kill him again he will come back to life?” “The Story of the Armor” ends with a question that seems originally to have been a rhetorical flourish meant to underscore the significance and unique nature of the rectification for a nocturnal emission. Presumably, there is no way back from death, and no way to restore the dead person to life. Therefore, the rectification for a nocturnal emission is a wondrous miracle. It is not armor that prevents the nocturnal emission from occurring–rather, it rectifies and heals the person who has been harmed by having experienced a nocturnal emission. The rectification is designed to help a person whom the armor did not protect and who was pierced by the arrows of death. Now, in the merit of the rectification, he returns to life. And in the future as well, if he will again be harmed, with the aid of the rectification he will again be able to return to life. The rectification possesses elements of

53 Likutei Moharan I 107. Many of Rabbi Nachman’s discourses make use of the concept of war, most often in the sense of a person’s war against his evil inclination. See Likutei Moharan I 2; ibid. 9:4; 20:10; 63; 107; 251; 280. 54 b. Berakhot 13b. 55 b. Nidah 13a. For additional behaviors whose purpose is to help a person contend with the problem of seminal emissions, see Reishit Chokhmah, Part 2 (“Sha’ar HaKedushah”), Chapter 17, pp. 540–548.

238 

 “The Story of the Armor”

the nature of a resurrection. That is something wondrous and miraculous, since in natural terms that which has been done cannot be undone. Since the person already expended seed in vain, he brought death upon himself and “he killed his children, literally”56 (as was described in Chapter 4 on the formation of the rectifications). In naturalistic terms it is not possible to turn back the wheel and revive the seed that was already spent in vain. The similarity between the rectification and resurrection fits extremely well with the description of the innovative nature of the rectification: And the manner of this rectification–by means of reciting the above-mentioned ten chapters of psalms–is a totally new matter, a wondrous innovation…. (And [Rabbi Nachman] said that this was not known since the day of the creation of the world.) No doubt I would have wanted to nullify this [desire] entirely, but that is impossible, both physically and spiritually…. Even Moses our teacher, peace be upon him, (like others similar [to him]), when he nullified nature did so only temporarily…. It would be necessary to nullify and change nature always, and this matter is impossible. And in spirituality it is impossible as well, etc.57

The rectification is a sort of resurrection of the dead, possessing something of the character of a change in the structure of Creation and of a nullification of nature, even if that nullification is “only temporary.”

Levirate marriage, expending seed in vain, and the resurrection of the dead Even if Rabbi Nachman’s question was rhetorical, Rabbi Aharon of Bratslav supplied the answer, proposing levirate marriage as a model of how it is possible for a dead person to be revived. Rabbi Aharon’s answer was adopted joyfully by Rabbi Nachman, who immediately developed Rabbi Aharon’s words and explained why the mitzvah of levirate marriage is indeed a model for the possibility of restoring a dead person to life:

56 Zohar, Part 1, (“VaYichi”), p. 219b. 57 Sichot Haran 141, pp. 178–179.



On the semantic field 

 239

And [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) nodded his head to him [in affirmation].58 [This is] because in levirate marriage the deceased [husband] returns to life by means of the levirate marriage, for “his wife has become his mother,”59 as is written in the holy Zohar, [for] he comes back to the world [as her son], as is known. But [what is] the [concept] of this matter, and [nowadays] how [does one] accomplish this [effect brought about by a levirate marriage,] since actual levirate marriage is not performed nowadays, and [yet] one needs to accomplish [its effect] on its level in its root, etc., etc. And he said that this is an attainment–i.e., an attainment that is one of his awesome attainments.

The idea behind these words is that if a childless married man dies and his brother marries his widow (levirate marriage) and they have a boy, that boy is a reincarnation of the dead man. As the Zohar states in Sabba Mishpatim, “His spouse has become his mother and his brother has become his father.”60 This zoharic teaching would have been known to Rabbi Aharon not only from the Zohar but also from Rabbi Nachman’s reference to it in his discourse, “Atika Tamir V’Satim,” which he had delivered about six years earlier, on Shabbat Nachamu, 5564.61 The Zohar describes the process that occurs in levirate marriage as a return to life, a resurrection of the dead. The Zohar applies the verse, “And many who sleep in the dust of the earth will awaken,” to those who are rectified by means of levirate marriage.62 58 In the original, there is no punctuation here. If a period is placed at this point, this may be read to mean that after Rabbi Nachman nodded his head affirmatively to Rabbi Aharon, he continued his speech, which had been interrupted by Rabbi Aharon’s statement, and went on to explain the meaning of the story. But if a comma is placed here, Rabbi Nachman is responding to Rabbi Aharon, and if not for Rabbi Aharon’s question, Rabbi Nachman would not have provided this explanation. 59 Stated in zoharic language. 60 Zohar, Part 2 (“Parshat Mishpatim”), p. 100b. 61 [A verse states, “May she not be like a dead person who emerges from his mother’s womb with half of his flesh consumed” (Numbers 12:12).] “Who emerges from his mother’s womb.” That corresponds to levirate marriage. Via levirate marriage, “his wife has become his mother” (Zohar)–[i.e., a dead man’s] wife becomes his mother. “With half of his flesh consumed.” That is to say, [the reincarnated man] has no spouse. [This is what this verse phrase means,] for a husband and his wife are two halves of one body. And now that his wife is his mother [so that he has no wife], half of his flesh is consumed, [in that] he has no marriage partner. Likutei Moharan I 21:6 62 Daniel 12:2; Zohar, Part 2 (“Sabba Mishpatim”), p. 100b.

240 

 “The Story of the Armor”

In levirate marriage, the soul of the deceased husband is restored to life in a new incarnation. This may serve as a model of rectification for a person who incurred death by having destroyed his seed, which was transferred to the power of the husk. The rectification “brings forth the drop from the husk that took it,”63 redeeming the drop and returning it to new life in the world of holiness. The comparison of the rectification for a nocturnal emission with levirate marriage underscores its wondrous and innovative character, since the Zohar describes levirate marriage–in which a man’s wife becomes his mother and his brother his father–as something amazing that goes against the grain of nature: Her husband was above–how greatly he was transformed, so that now he is below. His spouse has become his mother. Wonder of wonders, his brother has become his father. If his original father should redeem him, that would be fine. But that his brother should now be his father–is that not a wonder? The world is turned upside down. Certainly those above are below and those below are above.64 65

The writings of the Ari also describe the secret of levirate marriage as something that inverts reality: And in this we may understand [that the marriage to the] widow [is not called “marriage” but] a “statement.” [Levirate marriage] is not called “marriage” because in the secret of levirate marriage reality is transformed, and the matter is not in order. [The deceased husband] has descended drastically, as is explained in Sabba: “His brother has become his father. His wife has become his mother.” And in this context, when [the surviving brother] marries [the widow], that is not called “marriage.” [This is] because “marriage” is in the secret of chokhmah, the world of the male, the order of the Havayot [Divine names] as [properly] arranged in its framework. And that happens when a person weds a woman in the [usual] arrangement of marriage. But this [levirate marriage] is only called a “statement,” because of the descent [of the deceased husband] (as I have explained), and matters are not in order. And that is the secret of levirate marriage.66

63 Likutei Moharan I, 205. 64 Zohar, Part 2, (“Mishpatim”), p. 100b. 65 Translation based on Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh, Volume 5, p. 37. 66 Sha’ar HaPesukim (“Parshat Ki Teitzei”), p. 200 (emphasis mine [Zvi Mark]). According to a note that precedes this passage, it appears that the Ari is citing the view of Rabbi Moshe Cordovero. That note reads as follows: I [the transcriber, Rabbi Chaim Vital,] saw [fit] to write one matter here from that which I found in a manuscript of my teacher, [the Ari] (may his memory be for a blessing for the life of the world-to-come). It is relevant to the subject, as you will see clearly. And the following



On the semantic field 

 241

Rabbi Nachman stated, “But [what is] the [concept] of this matter, and [nowadays] how [does one] accomplish this [effect brought about by a levirate marriage,] since actual levirate marriage is not performed nowadays, and [yet] one needs to accomplish [its effect] on its level in its root, etc., etc.?” This indicates that Rabbi Nachman viewed the connection between levirate marriage and the rectification for a nocturnal emission as being even more profound and elemental than I have so far allowed. If by means of the rectification a person performs the mitzvah of levirate marriage “on its level in its root,” there is not only a superficial analogy but a certain degree of identification between the two. It appears that Rabbi Nachman’s rectification for a nocturnal emission is itself the performance of the mitzvah of levirate marriage “on its level in its root.” That being the case, it has the power to restore to life even someone who could be described as having been “killed.” Why is the rectification for a nocturnal emission the equivalent of levirate marriage “in its root”? What connection is there between the two? The answer goes back to the story of Er and Onan in Genesis, which is the earliest scriptural source that relates to levirate marriage, and which is also the earliest scriptural source that relates to the prohibition of expending seed in vain: Judah took a wife for Er, his first-born son, whose name was Tamar. Er, the first-born of Judah, was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and the Lord put him to death. And Judah said to Onan, “Come to your brother’s wife and take her in levirate marriage, and establish seed on behalf of your brother.” Onan knew that the seed would not be his, and when he came to the wife of his [deceased] brother, he wasted [his seed] on the ground so as not to give seed to his brother. What he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He killed him as well.67

The two polar opposites in this episode are levirate marriage and the destruction of seed. The passage states explicitly that Onan died for the sin of destroying seed, and the Talmudic sages contend that Er too was put to death for having is the language of my teacher, the rabbi, [the Ari] (may his memory be for a blessing for the life of the world-to-come): “And this is [a manuscript] that I found in the house of my teacher, [Rabbi Moshe Cordovero] (may his memory be for a blessing), although it is not definitely in his handwriting.” And in my [Rabbi Chaim Vital’s] humble opinion, this [refers to] one of the discourses of Rabbi Moshe Cordovero (may his memory be for a blessing), which he would deliver to his students. And nevertheless, I did not refrain from transcribing them [here], after having found them in the house of [the Ari]: the secret of levirate marriage and refusal of such; Thursday night. Ibid., pp. 199–200 67 Genesis 38:6–10.

242 

 “The Story of the Armor”

destroyed his seed (out of concern that pregnancy would mar Tamar’s beauty).68 The levirate marriage that was proposed to Onan was meant to comprise a sort of rectification for Er’s destruction of his seed. But Onan refused to actualize the levirate marriage and instead, like his brother, chose to destroy his seed. This episode is the source of the Talmudic dictum, “Whoever expends seed in vain is deserving of death. As the verse states, ‘What he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He killed him as well.’”69 The rectification for a nocturnal emission is similarly meant to in some way rectify the wasted seed, “for there is power in the recitation of psalms that brings forth the drop from the husk that took it.”70 Thus, the rectification possesses a certain aspect of levirate marriage. How the rectification brings that about, so that levirate marriage is actualized “on its level in its root,” is “an insight that is one of [Rabbi Nachman’s] awesome insights” and “a wondrous innovation” of his. Further on, I will discuss the [workings] of this “wondrous innovation.”

“Such language was not heard since the day of the creation of the world” And he said, “Such matters and such language were not heard since the day of the creation of heaven and earth.” And he said that there is someone who makes a wondrous vessel, and [when] someone [else] can imitate him and make it, that is also an innovation. But this [original] matter is such a wondrous innovation that even such language was not heard since the day of the creation of the world (as [mentioned] above).

Rabbi Nachman is apparently impressed not only with the substance of his innovation, but even with the new “language.” Rabbi Nachman compares this to a person who has invented a wondrous object that has no equal. If someone else were to imitate it, that would “also [be] an innovation,” but it could not compare to the original, which had no previous model. What is this new “language” of which Rabbi Nachman speaks? He did not occupy his mind with innovations in Hebrew or Yiddish. It would appear that Rabbi Nachman is claiming that the rectification is not a change in some particular element, but a new way of speech and discourse regarding the topics under discussion. That is to say, the rectification for a nocturnal emission should not be

68 b. Yevamot 34b. 69 b. Nidah 13a. 70 Likutei Moharan I 205.



On the semantic field 

 243

viewed as an addition to a long line of previous rectifications of this type but as a new way of relating to–a new discourse on–the topic of rectification. Although Rabbi Nachman praises this new language directly after telling “The Story of the Armor” and in conjunction with it discussing levirate marriage, it appears that he is not referring to “The Story of the Armor,” but to his proposal to recite the ten chapters of psalms as a rectification for a nocturnal emission. That this is so is indicated by a parallel passage that uses similar terminology, speaking of a “totally new … rectification” that “was not known since the day of the creation of the world.”71 That passage is speaking explicitly about a “rectification” and not “The Story of the Armor,” as an innovation that was not known since the day of the creation of the world. The rectification being spoken of in that passage may be understood to be not the universal rectification–whether in the original form or in its later form as a rectification of pilgrimage performed at his gravesite–but the rectification for a nocturnal emission. That this is the case may be derived as follows. When (in that passage from Sichot Haran, 141) Rabbi Natan speaks of a rectification as a great innovation of Rabbi Nachman, he talks of other books that mention it but do not attribute it to Rabbi Nachman, and he says that their authors knew that Rabbi Nachman created it, but since he has opponents who would not accept the rectification if they knew that it was his, these authors did not attribute it to him. Clearly Rabbi Natan is not speaking of the rectification of pilgrimage performed at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite, for it would be impossible to conceal the connection between that rectification and Rabbi Nachman. Rather, the great “innovation” must refer solely to the rectification for a nocturnal emission, which a person can perform without coming to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite and without mentioning Rabbi Nachman as its author. At first glance, this description by Rabbi Nachman of his rectification for a nocturnal emission as a great innovation may seem astonishing. There can be nothing more simple and commonplace than reciting psalms. So what is the great innovation inherent in this rectification? It appears that the innovation inheres precisely in this point: in the possibility of rectifying the blemish of a nocturnal emission without fasting or self-mortification but solely by means of reciting ten chapters of psalms. This rectification stands in complete contrast to the spirit of earlier rectifications that were proposed for a nocturnal emission and blemishes of the covenant, rectifications that included drastic measures with a blatantly ascetic cast. The kavanot (mystical contemplations) of the Ari dedicated to such a rectification are accompanied by guidelines for self-mortification: 71 Sichot Haran, 141, pp. 174–181.

244 

 “The Story of the Armor”

[On] the topic of the well-known “shovavim” [annual period]: that is to say that there is an ancient custom in all Israel to fast 40 consecutive days…. And the essence of the fast on these 40 days was instituted solely for the sin of a seminal emission.72 In addition, a person must fast 84 consecutive days…. And it is proper that a person fast for the [above]-mentioned 40 days that constitute all of the shovavim days, and afterwards fast for another 44 days, to complete the 84 days (mentioned [above]).73

Similarly, in his Reishit Chokhmah, Rabbi Eliyahu de Vidas offers a wide variety of ways to rectify this sin,74 which involve self-mortification as an essential component: A person who expends [his] seed in vain should fast for 40 days, not [necessarily] consecutive. And he should sit in water in the winter days for the amount of time required to roast an egg. And during those 40 days, he should not eat meat or anything hot at night, nor should he drink wine–except on Sabbaths and holidays. And during all those 40 days, he should [not bathe, except] wash his head a little in water two or three times.75

Similarly, Rabbi Yishayahu Horowitz’s widely accepted Shenei Luchot HaBrit emphasizes the need for self-mortification: And it is known that for each sin [that a person has committed] there are four [types of] repentance, as set out by the Rokeach…. And if [a person committed a sin that deserves] the punishment of death, one must assign him mortifications equal to [that type of] death [penalty]. And a person who expends seed in vain is liable to the death [penalty]. And the Rokeach and the Godly Arizal have [each] arranged an order of repentance for this sin, and [each approach constitutes] “the words of the living God.”76

In contrast to this tradition, which incorporates a component of self-punishment into the process of rectification,77 Rabbi Nachman proposes rectification by means of reciting ten chapters of psalms, without any accompanying self-mortification. As an alternative to the approach that “according to the pain is the

72 Sha’ar Ruach HaKodesh (Tikun 27), p. 62. 73 Ibid., p. 63. 74 Reishit Chokhmah HaShaleim, Part 2 (“Sha’ar HaKedushah”) Chapters 17–18, pp. 499–569. 75 Ibid. (“Sha’ar HaTeshuvah”), Chapter 7, p. 841. 76 Shenei Luchot HaBrit (“Sha’ar Ha’Otiot”), p. 71. 77 Regarding “repentance [balanced] on the scales” and “scriptural repentance” (a regimen of repentance corresponding to scriptural punishments), see Sefer HaRokeach (“Hilkhot Teshuvah”), pp. 25–28; and also see Dan, Sifrut HaMusar VeHaDerush, pp. 129–133.



On the semantic field 

 245

reward,”78 Rabbi Nachman emphasizes joy, which lifts a person’s spirit and rectifies his deeds and conduct. Joy, rather than the suffering of self-mortification, comprises an effective tool in the war against Lilith, the husk responsible for a person’s expending seed in vain. Since Lilith is characterized by weeping and wailing,79 it is rectified by melody and joy. I will discuss the centrality of joy in Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications further on in Chapter 7 (dedicated to “The Story of the Sixth Beggar”–the beggar without hands–and the roots of that story in the Tikunei Zohar). Rabbi Nachman’s innovative rectification contrasts not only with the approaches that were widespread among pre-Hasidic kabbalists but also with the views expressed on this topic by the early Hasidic masters. Rivka Schatz-Oppenheimer asserts that “the stance [of the Baal Shem Tov,] which discounted the gravity of expending seed in vain, was well-known.”80 This attitude was expressed in the Baal Shem Tov’s statement that “a person should not worry about an unclean occurrence, if he experienced an accidental emission.”81 The Baal Shem Tov even explained that if the seed had remained within the person it might have caused his death, and so possibly its expenditure saved him from death.82 Heschel and Liebes have argued that Rabbi Nachman followed the path of the classic kabbalah and, in contrast to the Baal Shem Tov, emphasized the gravity of a nocturnal emission and the need for rectification. However, Yehoshua Mondshine has noted that Rabbi Nachman shares the Baal Shem Tov’s lenient attitude about a nocturnal emission that occurred completely by accident, as expressed in his statement that “there is a person who experiences [a nocturnal emission] because he ate or drank a good deal, or because he is weak and weary, or because he did not lie down in a proper [position]. And all [such cases are] nothing. ([Such a case] is comparable to a child urinating in [his] sleep.)… But if someone experiences [a nocturnal emission] due 78 Sefer HaRokeach (“Hilkhot Teshuvah”), p. 26. 79 “And halleluyah [(‘praise God’)] … is the opposite of the husk whose name is Lilith, so-called because she wails with constant ‘wailing’ [(yelalah)]. And “praise” is the opposite of “wailing,” for the letters of [the word] halleli [(‘praise’)] are the opposite of [the letters of the word yelalah [(‘wail’)]” (Likutei Moharan I 205). And Liebes emphasizes correctly that Rabbi Nachman’s rectification for a nocturnal emission is based on joy (Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 256). 80 Schatz-Oppenheimer, Hasidism as Mysticism, pp.  102–103. And Liebes follows in this approach. See Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p.  253 and p.  443, note 109. And see also Heschel, “R. Nachman miKosov,” pp. 133 and 139, and ibid., note 32. 81 Ohr Torah (“Parshat Re’eh”), pp. 85–86. 82 Ibid.

246 

 “The Story of the Armor”

to [his sexual] thoughts, heaven forbid, that creates husks literally, heaven forbid, as is explained in [the kabbalistic] literature.”83 Rabbi Nachman also states, “[The Talmud teaches that] ‘a nocturnal emission is a good sign for a sick person’ (Berakhot 57b)…. And so that [emission] that this person experienced is a favor for him … because the concealed impurity leaves him (as mentioned above).”84 Thus, it is clear that regarding incidents in which a person “experienced an emission by accident–without any foreign thought and fantasy”85 there is no difference between Rabbi Nachman and the Baal Shem Tov: both teach that a person should not worry at all, and he requires no rectification. The rectification for a nocturnal emission that Rabbi Nachman proposed was designated precisely for an occurrence that the Baal Shem Tov too viewed as grave: i.e., a nocturnal emission that results from “foreign thought and fantasy.” The Baal Shem Tov said that a person must worry about such an occurrence because he experienced it as a result of “not having purified [his] thought.”86 In the context of the Baal Shem Tov’s statement, Rabbi Nachman’s rectification is a significant and cardinal innovation, for it provides a rectification for those incidents that the Baal Shem Tov viewed seriously and for which he did not propose any rectification beyond those that were common in the kabbalistic literature. In light of that, the fact that the students of the Baal Shem Tov had the custom of fasting when they experienced a nocturnal emission is not surprising.87 Possibly, despite the sources cited here that emphasize the gravity of expending seed in vain, the reader will view Rabbi Nachman’s vehement enthusiasm for his rectification as out of proportion to the blemish that it is intended to rectify. But the great significance that he attributed to his rectification must be measured in the context of his milieu. As a number of scholars have pointed out, from the end of the seventeenth century to the beginning of the nineteenth, the fearful nature of experiencing a nocturnal emission was a central element in the liter-

83 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 178. 84 Likutei Moharan II 117. 85 That is the language of the Baal Shem Tov as quoted in Maggid Devarav LeYaakov, 160, p. 256. 86 Maggid Devarav LeYaakov, ibid. Ohr Torah, ibid. R. Schatz-Oppenheimer’s statement that the Baal Shem Tov “drew a distinction between thought and deed” is imprecise, for the Baal Shem Tov distinguished between accidental expense of seed and expense of seed that results from thoughts (and not necessarily from an act) (see Schatz-Oppenheimer, ibid., p. 103, note 28). 87 Regarding Rabbi Nachman of Kosov, who, as a resulting of experiencing a nocturnal emission, fasted from Sabbath to Sabbath, see Heschel, “Rabbi Nachman miKosov.” On p. 139, note 32, Heschel cites examples of regimens that students of the Maggid of Mezeritch prescribed for a person who experienced a nocturnal emission, including fasting and repenting. Unlike Heschel, I do not see these citations as expressing a stance different than that of the Baal Shem Tov.



On the semantic field 

 247

ature of moral discourse in traditional Jewish society. The topic perturbed the spirit of the people of that time, giving them no rest. Entire books were dedicated to this topic. Hardly a volume of ethical instruction or a sermon neglected mentioning the gravity of the blemish and proposing rectifications of atonement that included onerous acts of self-mortification, including multiple fasts, which might take years to complete.88 A passage from the teachings of Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov (grandson of the Baal Shem Tov and uncle of Rabbi Nachman, who was ordained by Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye and who was a leading student of the Baal Shem Tov) gives clear expression to the especial gravity with which those in the Hasidic world viewed the blemish of a nocturnal emission: The sin of expending seed in vain, even if that [comes about through] an error, [incurs] the judgment of death. The first time [it occurs,] the Sitra Achra removes [a person’s] nefesh, the second time [it removes his] ruach, and the third time [it removes his] neshamah. That turns him in the direction of the husks, preventing him from accepting reproof [and thus] causing [his] death–may the Merciful One protect us.89

The expense of seed in vain, even if by accident, condemns a person to the judgment of death. In addition, it removes his nefesh, ruach and neshamah, and it denies him the possibility of accepting reproof and engaging in repentance. Against the background of such an attitude that characterized Jewish and Hasidic society, Rabbi Nachman’s joy and pride is well-understood. He had succeeded in finding an easy and immediate rectification90 for something that was conceptualized as one of the major stumbling blocks of his generation–in particular, for the youth–for which, until that point, a person could find rest for his soul only through the self-punishment of onerous acts of self-mortification and numerous fasts.

88 See for instance Katz, Masoret UMashber, pp. 166–167. Recently, Gershon Hundert has discussed this topic at length and quoted many instructive examples of this genre, some from Hasidic literature, including one by Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov that I will cite further on. Hundert proposes that the focus on this topic resulted not only from the increased influence of kabbalistic attitudes on experiencing a nocturnal emission but also from an increase in the age of marriage due to financial considerations. That created a period of extended bachelorhood, which intensified the prevalence and thus the awareness of the problematic nature of expending seed in vain–in particular, experiencing a nocturnal emission. See Hundert, Jews in Poland-Lithuania in the Eighteenth Century, pp. 131–138. And see also ibid., pp. 174–175. 89 Degel Machaneh Efraim (“Parshat Eikev”), p. 115. 90 “It is an easy thing to recite ten chapters of psalms” (Sichot Haran, 141, p. 180).

248 

 “The Story of the Armor”

6 The impetus to esotericism91 Why did Rabbi Nachman direct that “the topic of this ‘Story of the Armor’ should be secret, and they should only reveal it to select individuals”? Apparently, the topic of the armor and the discourse that developed in consequence of the story contain a number of components that Rabbi Nachman preferred not to make public.

The secret of levirate marriage and reincarnation The first component is the kabbalistic reason for levirate marriage, which involves the element of reincarnation–a topic that was considered to be one of the most closely guarded secrets of the kabbalah. As noted earlier, according to kabbalistic interpretation, the son born from a levirate marriage is a reincarnation of the deceased man. When Rabbi Nachman discusses this, he explicitly cites his source as the Zohar: “as is written in the holy Zohar.” The Zohar discusses this at length in Parshat Mishpatim, in the chapter called Sabba DeMishpatim. The Sabba (‘Grandfather’)–a central figure who reveals the secrets of reincarnation and levirate marriage–expresses doubts as to whether to divulge this information, for “this hidden matter does not need to be revealed.”92 Having done so, he rebukes himself, “Grandfather, Grandfather, what have you done? Silence would have been good for you.”93 Others too rebuke him: “Grandfather, Grandfather, you came to reveal a supernal secret that had been concealed. What have you done?” And he cries out, “I fear the Master of the world, for I have revealed hidden paths without permission.”94 In the kabbalah preceding the Zohar, the secret of levirate marriage and reincarnation is one of the most recondite mysteries, one that is not to be expounded even to those familiar with kabbalah.95 Even after the zoharic discussion of reincarnation–the mechanism behind levirate marriage–this topic was considered to be within the category of “secrets” even amidst kabbalists.96 It is therefore possible that Rabbi Nachman did not want the “secret of levirate marriage,” for which 91 See above, Chapter 2, note 1. 92 Zohar, Part 2, (“Mishpatim”), p. 100b. 93 Ibid. 94 Ibid., Part 2 (“Mishpatim”), p. 102a. 95 See on this Scholem, Pirkei Yesod, pp.  316–318; Oron, “‘Simini kechotam,’” pp.  13–14–the notes there provide additional sources. 96 See Sha’ar HaPesukim (Parshat Ki Teitzei), p. 200 (quoted above in footnote 66). For more on the relationship to the topic of reincarnation and levirate marriage as a secret in the early kabbalah and in Sefer HaPeliah, see Oron, “HaPeliah vehaKaneh,” pp. 301–309.



The impetus to esotericism 

 249

silence is fitting, and which induces a person who reveals it to be seized by fear, to be transformed into public discourse as a result of the popularization of the rectification for a nocturnal emission. Therefore, he instructed his followers to reveal this part of his talk only to select individuals.

The problematical nature of the commandment of levirate marriage The second component is linked to the problematic nature of levirate marriage. Although this second component overlaps with the first, they should be addressed separately. The connection of the rectification to levirate marriage means that it is connected to a problematical model. Levirate marriage possesses a questionable nature that cannot be obscured by the fact that it has scriptural basis. In levirate marriage, a man and woman engage in behavior that in any other context would be defined by the Torah as a sexual crime punishable by excision. This led to the Ashkenazi halachic ruling that, practically speaking, the commandment of levirate marriage is not in force and must be replaced with the mitzvah of chalitzah (a ceremonial breaking of ties between the widow and her brother-inlaw).97 Similarly, among the kabbalists who spoke of the enormous importance of levirate marriage there were those who stated that practically speaking this commandment should not be performed because–among other reasons–it involved bringing a soul back to life. In the words of Sefer HaPeliah: “Know that in the time of exile we do not practice levirate marriage, for levirate marriage requires [a person’s] intent to bring back the soul [of the deceased] by the commandment of its Creator…. And this commandment is permitted only in the land of Israel at the time that the Temple exists, when the intent [of people in general] is pure and clean, or [permitted only to] the Tannaim and Amoraim [the Talmudic sages]– they and their students and the students of their students–whose thought is pure and clean. But from then onward one should not perform levirate marriage.”98 Rabbi Nachman’s statement that now as well a person should perform levirate marriage–although not literally but “on its level in its root”–is liable to be 97 Regarding levirate marriage, see entry “yibum,” Ensiklopidiah Talmudit, Volume 21, pp. 299– 304. See also Yaakov Katz’s essay, “Yibum vechalitzah bitekufat hab’tar Talmudit,” in Halakhah VeKabbalah, pp. 127–174, which discusses the influence of kabbalistic concepts regarding levirate marriage on the halachic decision as to whether levirate marriage or chalitzah is preferable. See also Katz, “Yachasei halakhah vekabbalah bedorot shel’achar ‘hitgalut’ haZohar,” ibid., pp. 62–65. 98 Cf. Oron, “HaPeliah vehaKaneh,” p.  304. Regarding the dispute among kabbalists on this topic, see Oron, ibid., note 26.

250 

 “The Story of the Armor”

regarded as problematical: first, because it has a flavor of “a mitzvah that comes about through a sin,” and second, because it involves the presumptuous goal of “bring[ing] back the soul.” From the context of Rabbi Nachman’s words, it is clear that “in its root” levirate marriage relates to the rectification for a nocturnal emission, a rectification that returns the drop to its proper place and bestows renewed life both upon the seed that had been destroyed and upon the person who had incurred death (as discussed earlier). Publicizing this might take matters out of their subtle and particular context, and people would be liable to err in their understanding. Rabbi Nachman, who was subject to a surfeit of dispute and excommunications, knew that his words were examined with a critical and often hostile eye, and that any slip of the tongue, real or apparent, was liable to fan the flames of dispute against him and his Hasidim–or at least turn the rectification into the object of dispute, which would compromise its acceptance. Rabbi Natan’s sense that this indeed occurred–that the dispute against Rabbi Nachman prevented the widespread acceptance of the rectification–is indicated in the following passage. [Rabbi Nachman] said, “Although it is an easy thing to recite the ten chapters of psalms, nevertheless, this too will be very hard to do.” And so it has now come about, for our many sins, that because of the extent of the dispute, most of the masses are very far from doing this. And [Rabbi Nachman], may his memory be for a blessing, foretold all of this.99

An additional expression of the influence of the dispute on the limits to the acceptance of the rectification is articulated in Rabbi Natan’s explanation of the fact that there are books that mention the rectification without attributing it to Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav: And it is possible that the above-mentioned rabbi and others, out of their great desire to help people with such a great rectification, knowing that there are opponents and disputants against our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing), applied the statement of our Sages (may their memory be for a blessing) that “it is permissible to shade facts in order to keep the peace”100–in particular, regarding such a great matter, such a rectification.101

99 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 180. 100 b. Yevamot 65b. 101 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 181.



The impetus to esotericism 

 251

Presumptuousness The third component liable to arouse dispute is the great presumptuousness in Rabbi Nachman’s words–in particular, in his boast about the innovative nature of his rectification and in his comparison of its effect with the resurrection of the dead–a comparison that apparently expresses Rabbi Nachman’s presumptuous view of himself as a figure in possession of one of the three keys that, the Talmudic sages state, were not assigned to creatures of flesh and blood.102 This blends with the presumptuousness of his proposal that something as extraordinarily “easy” as reciting ten chapters of psalms can serve as a substitute of equal value to the many tens of fasts and acts of self-mortification that had until now been proposed as acts of rectification for a nocturnal emission. Such a proposal could be interpreted as discounting the gravity of the blemish and as disrespecting the kabbalists who had composed those previous rectifications. Support for the idea that all of Rabbi Nachman’s presumptuous expressions in this conversation were originally meant to be kept secret may be inferred from Rabbi Natan’s words in Sichot Haran, 141. In this section, from which I quoted earlier and to which “The Story of the Armor” relates,103 Rabbi Natan describes at length the circumstances of Rabbi Nachman’s revelation of the ten chapters of psalms, doing so in order to prove that “this was not known since the day of the creation of the world”–i.e., that this rectification is solely Rabbi Nachman’s innovation. The end of this passage demonstrates that Rabbi Natan felt that he was revealing something that should ideally have been kept secret: And now, you may truly understand that [our] earlier statement–that [these ten psalms] constitute an entirely new rectification of which no creature knew from all time– are correct. Recite [these psalms] in the name of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing), so that his lips will murmur, etc.,104 something for which all tzaddikim yearn. And since we were compelled to reveal all of the above, may [Rabbi Nachman’s] merit stand by us, and rectify us and save us from all of our blemishes and our troubles. Amen. May it be [God’s] will.

It is only possible to speak of revealing that which was previously hidden. Rabbi Natan’s phrase, “We were forced to reveal,” indicates that he did so under compul102 See b. Ta’anit 2a. 103 See the quotation from Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot [5693], p. 193) quoted at the beginning of this chapter, and also the opening of “The Story of the Armor,” quoted above in Section 3. In the Horowitz manuscript, a connection to Sichot Haran, 141, does not appear. 104 b. Sanhedrin 90b.

252 

 “The Story of the Armor”

sion, and in opposition to his desire to conceal. Apparently, Rabbi Natan understood Rabbi Nachman to have directed that only the rectification be revealed, whereas the entirety of the rest of the conversation, which praises the rectification–and by extension Rabbi Nachman–should remain unpublished. However, when Rabbi Natan saw that the rectification that Rabbi Nachman had innovated was being attributed to others, he decided to defend Rabbi Nachman’s honor and describe the exact chronology of Rabbi Nachman’s revelation of the rectification. In so doing, Rabbi Natan quoted parts of Rabbi Nachman’s conversations with Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon that had not been meant for publication. According to Rabbi Natan’s understanding, neither Rabbi Nachman’s boast that “such matters and such language were not heard since the day of the creation of heaven and earth” (which were recorded in the unpublished manuscripts) nor the comparison of the rectification to the miracles that Moses performed in Egypt (which appear in the published text of Sichot Haran) were supposed to be publicized. Only the need to rectify the distortions and restore the attribution of the rectification to its author induced Rabbi Natan to publish the narrative that demonstrates that the rectification is Rabbi Nachman’s in toto. Compared to the text of the manuscripts, the published text moderates the description of the innovation. Whereas the manuscripts speak of the making of an entirely new vessel and the formation of a completely new language, Sichot Haran describes the innovation as a revelation of something that had existed but had not been known: “and [Rabbi Nachman] said that this was not known since the day of the creation of the world”; “and no creature knew of this from the earliest days.”105 The proposal made here–that the suppressed passage was censored due to its presumptuousness and boastfulness–matches the nature of the other esoteric material recorded in Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan and other manuscripts.106 The great majority of this material consists of Rabbi Nachman’s praise of himself, often in terms of his superiority to other leaders of his generation and to figures from the past such as the Baal Shem Tov, Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and even Moses.107 There is no doubt that this presumptuousness aroused opposition and dispute. Thus, 105 Similarly, in many editions of the (so-called) universal rectification, the following text appears on the title page: “brought out from concealment to revelation by admor … our teacher, the rabbi, Rebbe Nachman (may the memory of a holy tzaddik be for a blessing)” (the universal rectification published together with Alim LiTrufah, New York 5715). 106 See above, Chapter 2. 107 Regarding Rabbi Nachman’s link with Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and Moses, and on the link between Moses and the messiah in the Bratslav context, see Green, Tormented Master, pp. 117– 120, 185–186, 193, 347–348, and in particular 201–204; there Green deals with the perspective that “Rabbi Nachman has presented himself as the new Moses.” For more regarding the levels of Moses and Rabbi Nachman, see Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” pp. 238–248; Mondshine, “Al ‘Hatikun



The impetus to esotericism 

 253

Rabbi Nachman, and after him his Hasidim, chose to conceal these sayings until the opposition would die down and Rabbi Nachman’s greatness could be revealed.108 Regarding this, the following suppressed passage, which was originally meant to serve as part of the introduction to Shivchei Haran and Sichot Haran (and which only came to light in Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan), is relevant:

haklali,’” p. 199 note 5; Liebes, “Magamot becheker Chasidut,” p. 226; Mark, Mysticism and Madness, p. 21 and note 104, and pp. 30–31. Rabbi Nachman’s presumptuous comparison of himself with Moses implies that he claimed to be on a level higher than that of the Talmudic sages (including Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai) and of the Baal Shem Tov. And indeed, this is corroborated by much material from the elisions that were published in the omnibus volume principally containing (and overall entitled) Yemei HaTla’ot. [Rabbi Nachman] said: “How could it be possible that [others] would not dispute me, since I am going on a new way that no one has yet gone upon, not even the Baal Shem Tov or any [other] being? Although it is a very old way, nevertheless it is entirely new.” Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot [5693]), p. 190 “People yearn: when will there be [someone] like the Baal Shem Tov? If the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) were [alive again], he too would search.” Ibid., p. 194 “People will yearn for me a great deal much more than they yearned for the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing).” Chayei Moharan (“Ma’alat Torato USfarav HaKedoshim,” 354 [15]), p.  248, with material added in accordance with Yemei HaTla’ot (5757), p. 66 It appears that [Rabbi Nachman] said then that he attained what none of the Tannaim and Amoraim had attained. Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as, Yemei HaTla’ot [5693]), p. 194 Regarding Rabbi Nachman’s evaluation of himself as being on a level higher than that of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai, see Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 13–15. And this is also implied by the following elided text: Once [Rabbi Nachman] spoke with me and he said yearningly: “How does one get a group like [the group] that was with Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai?” And [he spoke other,] similar [words]. “I too would thrust my head among them. And probably where there would be [such] a group, I would be their rabbi (vi es valt geven a chevraya, valt ikh geven zeir rebbe).” Chayei Moharan (“Gedulat Hasagato”), 285 (45), p. 223, interwoven with Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot), p. 195 108 Regarding presumptuousness as a cause of the severe dispute against Rabbi Nachman, see Green, Tormented Master, pp. 112, 116–123.

254 

 “The Story of the Armor”

[The following is] an elision from the end of the introduction to the book, Sichot Haran.109 [Rabbi Nachman’s] very, very powerfully intense, extraordinary holiness is something that the mouth cannot speak and the heart cannot comprehend, so that the wise man will at this time remain silent. And whoever considers [this] in his heart will understand a little, like a drop from the Great Sea. And even of what we heard and saw, we have only hinted at here in part. And because of the intense dispute that has increased so greatly against us, we are forced to place a bit on our mouths and refrained from relating his praise. And the great power of his holiness and exalted station is exalted and elevated far beyond our knowledge. But even the tiny amount that we merited to slightly know and understand is impossible to tell entirely because of the great dispute, even though it would be a great benefit to the world to tell this for the generations to come and for the days to come in peace, so that it will not be forgotten from our mouths and from the mouths of our children forever, so that the coming generations may know the great love for Israel of the Lord, be He blessed, in that they merited in the last generations to have such a clear and pure light, a hidden and concealed light. Fortunate is the eye that saw him. Fortunate is the ear that heard his holy words from his mouth. And a person who deeply studies the books of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) will understand a fraction of a fraction of his great holiness. The words of the insignificant scribe, Natan, son of my father, my master my father, our teacher, the rabbi, Rabbi Naftali, may his Creator guard him and keep him alive.110

This is an important source on the nature of and rationale behind Bratslav self-censorship.  Rabbi Natan tells that although he believed it important to provide a historical record of the figure of Rabbi Nachman, fear of contention led him to place a bit on his mouth and refrain from flamboyantly praising his rabbi and recounting his rabbi’s greatness. This implies that at least part of the material deemed esoteric was suppressed for the reason that it describes “[Rabbi Nachman’s] very, very powerfully intense, extraordinary holiness.” As stated earlier, a substantial part of the suppressed material is dedicated to this theme.111 109 There is no introduction to the book called at present Sichot Haran; the reference here is to the book that is called at present Shivchei Haran (regarding Shivchei Haran and its names, see Assaf, Bibliografyah, pp. 15–16). Shivchei Haran has an introduction, the last third of which opens with the words, “But know that everything that is explained here is not even like a drop in the Great Sea, and [in regard to Rabbi Nachman’s] great holiness and extraordinary level….” This is apparently a censored variation of the original version, quoted in full above. See Shivchei Haran, p. 4 110 Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot [5693]), pp. 189–190. 111 And see Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 10–16, and in particular, p. 13.



“The Story of the Armor” 

 255

Rabbi Yom Tov Cheshin’s VeGam Bekhah Ya’aminu L’Olam (awaiting publication) deals with the topic of Rabbi Nachman’s presumptuousness. The book is in two parts. The first presents a broad survey of many precedents in Jewish tradition–particularly, kabbalistic and Hasidic–of the self-praise of great individuals. The second presents an attempt to understand the rationale for self-praise and the unique nature of Rabbi Nachman’s presumptuousness.

7 “The Story of the Armor” and the hypothesized link between the rectification and Sabbatianism The armor in “The Story of the Armor” is not a model of the efficacious protection bestowed by the rectification for a nocturnal emission. Rather, it serves as an image of the limited utility of the usual means of protection employed in the war on behalf of the purity of the covenant.112 The rectification for a nocturnal emission is the solution when the armor has not supplied protection, and a person has been mortally wounded by arrows or the sword. The rectification has the power to revive such a person. Even if he is wounded a second time, he can utilize the rectification to return to life. Now that “The Story of the Armor” has been made accessible, it is possible to affirm that no connection exists between it and Sabbatianism or Frankism, and that the esoteric aspect of the rectification does not relate to a battle (whether that of the Baal Shem Tov or of Rabbi Nachman) with Sabbatianism but to the nature of the rectification, its connection to the secret of levirate marriage, and its presumptuous character.113 Also, study of additional esoteric Bratslav material that has recently been revealed, which does not touch upon the topic of the 112 In Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Korman’s version of the story, the armor does not serve at all as an image for rectification. However, in the Horowitz manuscript and in other manuscripts (see above, Section 2), the armor does serve as an image for rectification: “How does one make armor that [even] if [the enemy] kill [a person] he will live again, and if they kill him again he will come back to life?” But this version is problematical and hard to understand, for armor keeps a person from getting hurt in the first place, and so it is not a fitting image for an incident in which a person has already been injured. Therefore, the Korman version appears preferable, for the word “armor” does not appear in it. Even if a person concludes that the Horowitz version is more precise, and that it presents Rabbi Nachman’s language, the second usage of the image of the armor to describe the rectification does not work well, for it cannot explain anything new about the nature of the rectification. 113 Similarly, the attempt to connect “the term, ‘defenders of the land,’ to the armor of the universal rectification” (Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 258) is problematical, for the armor does not represent the rectification that Rabbi Nachman proposes, but those behaviors that fail in their

256 

 “The Story of the Armor”

rectification (e.g., various manuscripts of Chayei Moharan that contain the previously suppressed “Story of the Bread” and Megillat Setarim) shows that they too contain no allusion to Sabbatianism and Frankism. These revelations strengthen Green’s contention that “[i]n fact, however, hard evidence to support the claim that Nahman was accused of Sabbatianism is lacking.”114 These revelations also bolster Mondshine’s claims in his above-mentioned essay, leading to a rejection of the academic argument that the esoteric stratum of Bratslav literature deals with intensive attempts by Rabbi Nachman to rectify the sin of Sabbatianism–an argument that is based on the view that according to Rabbi Nachman “the nation’s sin of sins” is “the Sabbatian sin.”115 It is now possible to clearly determine that although Rabbi Nachman was aware of Sabbatianism and Frankism and even referred to them in his writings,116 that was an extremely marginal part of his endeavors, and Sabbatianism played no meaningful role in his world. The esoteric levels of his creativity related to topics other than Sabbatianism or Frankism.117 In the coming chapter, I will discuss the central conceptual aspects of the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the recitation of ten chapters of psalms, with reference to kabbalistic sources that inform Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, and I will discuss the connection between the rectifications and “The Story of the Seven Beggars.” Similarly, I will address the question of whether Rabbi Nachman established his rectifications at times of particular messianic fervor.

purpose of preventing injury. Rabbi Nachman’s rectification is presented in opposition to the rectifications of the armor. 114 Green, Tormented Master, p. 100. And see ibid., note 26, on pp. 126, which refutes at length the claims that Rabbi Nachman was accused of Sabbatianism. 115 Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” pp. 253–254. 116 Such as Likutei Moharan I 207, where a passage regarding Sabbatianism is almost a wordfor-word quotation from Sefer HaBrit. See Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 87–88, note 9 (in the Hebrew edition only). 117 This approach will receive support in the coming chapters, as well as from a clarification of why Bratslav Hasidim were persecuted while under Rabbi Natan’s leadership. See Mark, “Lamah radaf haRav miSavran.”

Chapter Seven Arrows and Melodies: “The Story of the Beggar without Hands” Regarding “The Story of the Sixth Day” … see this wondrous and awesome matter. If you are among the “reapers of the field,” [meaning,] if you have gazed in [kabbalistic] books–in particular, the Tikunim and Zohar and Sabba–you may understand from a distance (like someone peering through the cracks) [its] awesome wonders, [its] perfect thoughts. And one need not expand on this.1

1 “Un ikh heil zi” (‘And I heal her’) Besides the secret “Story of the Armor” discussed in the previous chapter, another narrative of Rabbi Nachman has a direct bearing on the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification. That is “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” (the beggar without hands), from “The Story of the Seven Beggars.”2 “The Story of the Seven Beggars” was not told in one session but over the course of about two weeks’ time.3 The structure consists of a frame story inside of which a second frame story is inserted, in which many linked but independent stories are inserted. Insofar as “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” concludes “The 1 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 6 (“Even Ha’Ezer: Hilkhot Piryah VeRivyah V’Ishut,” 3), p. 22. 2 Rabbi Nachman and his Hasidim extolled the preeminence of “The Story of the Seven Beggars” among all of his stories. I heard directly from Rabbi Naftali (may his memory be for a blessing) that after our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) told “The Story of the Seven Beggars,” he spoke at length of its excellence. And he said that one may travel to Brody and enter the synagogue and tell the sexton to gather everyone together for a sermon and strike the table [on which the Torah is read, to gain people’s attention,] and tell them this story. Chayei Moharan (“Sichot HaShayakhim LeSipurei Ma’asiot,” 63 [4]), p. 77 [Regarding] the awesome and wondrous story, the like of which was never heard before, the final, awesome “Story of the Seven Beggars,” [Rabbi Nachman] said that if he knew nothing but this story, that too would be a supreme and wondrous innovation. Likutei Halakhot, Volume 6 (“Even Ha’Ezer: Hilkhot Piryah VeRivyah V’Ishut,” 4), p. 22 When [Rabbi Nachman] told me this “Story [of the Seven Beggars,]” I stood trembling and stunned. It is true that I had heard many awesome stories from him. But I had never heard such a story from his holy mouth. Sichot Haran, 149, pp. 189–190 3 Sichot Haran, 149, pp. 189–192. Rabbi Nachman began to tell the story on a Friday night, Parshat Shemini, 25 Adar II 5570 (Chayei Moharan [“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” 59], p. 73).

258 

 Arrows and Melodies

Story of the Seven Beggars,” which is the last story in Sipurei Ma’asiyot, “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” concludes the book as a whole, and may be seen as its culmination. Further on, I will explain how this story has a direct bearing on both the rectification for a nocturnal emission and “The Story of the Armor.” This explanation provides a fuller understanding of that story, one that supports my interpretation in Chapter 6. An analysis of the frame stories of “The Story of the Seven Beggars” and of the rich, encompassing totality of the inserted tales requires its own study, far beyond the bounds of the present analysis. Here I limit my focus to “The Story of the Sixth Beggar,” which bears directly upon the topic of the rectifications (the focal point of this book).

The story of the beggar who had no hands “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” is inserted within two frame stories. The overarching frame story tells about a prince who became king in his father’s lifetime, following which he turned to wisdom and philosophy and disordered his way in life, so that in his confusion he wandered between faith and heresy. The frame story within that tells about a boy and girl who fled to a forest, where they had nothing to eat. The children cried and seven beggars appeared, one after the other, and each one gave them bread. Each of these beggars had a different handicap.  The children then left the forest and joined a band of wandering beggars. On the band’s initiative, the boy and girl were married. The wedding took place in a large pit covered with trash, and the food for the wedding came from the remnants of a royal feast. The joy of this wedding was tremendous. During each of the seven days of feasting, the children remembered one of the beggars who had helped them in the forest, and they yearned to see him. Immediately he appeared, blessed them, and gave them a wedding gift. On the sixth day, [the boy and girl] were happy as well, and they yearned, “How could the man without hands come here?” Then he came, and he said, “Here I am! I have come to you, to [your] wedding.” And he said to them the same [words] that [the other beggars had said]. And he kissed them and said to them:

“Un ikh heil zi” (‘And I heal her’) 

 259

(You think that I have a blemish in my hands.) I am not at all crippled in my hands. To the contrary, I have power in my hands. However, I do not use the power in my hands in this world, because I need the power for something else. And I have a confirmation to this effect from the castle made of water. [This is] because one time a few of us were sitting together, and each one boasted of the power in his hands. One person boasted that he has one kind of power in his hands, and another boasted that he had another kind of power in his hands. And so everyone boasted about the power that he had in his hands. (That is), [more specifically,] that one person boasted of the power and might in his hands that when he shoots an arrow, he can [seize it and] draw it [back] to him, because he has such power in his hands that even after he has shot the arrow, he can [seize it] and draw it [back] to him. And I asked [that person]: “Which arrow can you draw back?” [I asked him this question] because there are ten types of arrows. [And there are ten types of arrows] because there are ten types of poison. That is to say, when a person wants to shoot an arrow, he smears it with a poison. And there are ten types of poison. When one smears [an arrow] with [one type of] poison, that causes a certain type of damage, and when one smears [an arrow] with another poison, it causes greater damage. And so there are ten types of poison, one worse (that is to say, more harmful) than the next. And that itself constitutes ten types of arrows. The arrows are of one type, but because of the different poisons smeared on each arrow, which are of ten types (as [mentioned] above), there are said to be ten types of arrows. Therefore, [the beggar without hands] asked [the other man] which type of arrow he can retrieve. He also asked him if he can retrieve it before the arrow reaches the person it was aimed at, and if he can retrieve it back after the arrow reached [its target]. [The other man] answered that even if the arrow has reached [its target,] he can still retrieve it. But regarding what kind of arrow he can retrieve, etc. (as [mentioned] above), he answered that he can retrieve such-and-such type of arrow. I told him: If so, you cannot heal the princess, because you can only grasp and retrieve one type of arrow. Therefore, you cannot heal the princess. One person boasted that he has such power in his hands that that he gives to whomever he takes and receives from (meaning that in the very taking and receiving he gives, because his receiving is giving). And thus he is a master of charity. And I asked him: Which [kind of] charity do you give? ([This is] because there are ten kinds of charity.) He answered that he gives a tenth. I said to him: If so, you cannot heal the princess, because you cannot by any means get to where she is, because you can only enter through one wall (where she is sitting). And therefore, you cannot come to where she is.

260 

 Arrows and Melodies

One person boasted that he has such power in his hands that [he can accomplish the following]. There are [angelic] authorities in the world, each one of whom needs wisdom. And he has such power in his hands that with his hands, by means of laying his hands on them, he can give them wisdom. I asked him: Which wisdom can you give with your hands? [I asked this] because there are ten measures of wisdom. He answered: Such-and-such a wisdom. I said to him: If that is the case, you cannot heal the princess, because you cannot know her pulse, because you can only know one pulse. This is because there are ten types of pulses. One person boasted that he has such power in his hands that when there is a storm wind he can stop it with his hands, and with his hands he can make a [properly] balanced wind, so that the wind will [blow] in the proper measure. I asked him: Which [kind of] wind can you grasp in your hands? [I asked him this,] because there are ten kinds of winds. He answered: Such-and-such a wind. I told him: If so, you cannot heal the princess, because you can only play one melody before her. [I said this] because there are ten types of melody, and melody [constitutes] her remedy. And you can only play one melody of those ten. They spoke up and said: What is your ability? He answered: I can do what you cannot do–that is to say, all nine parts mentioned above (of everything mentioned above) that you cannot do, I can do everything. [He said this] because there is a [background to this matter, which is in the form of a] story. [This is] because one time a king desired a princess. And he tried [various] schemes to catch her, until he [at last] succeeded in catching her. One time, that king dreamt that she was standing over him and that she killed him. And he woke up, and the dream entered his heart. And he summoned all of the dream interpreters. And they interpreted [it] for him in its straightforward sense, that the dream will come literally true: that she will kill him. And the king could not decide what to do to her. To kill her would be painful to him. To cast her away from his presence would upset him, because someone else would take her, and that upset him a great deal, because he had worked so hard to get her, and now she would go into someone else’s hands. And also, if he sent her away and she went into someone else’s hands, now certainly [that person] could fulfill the dream that she would kill him, since she would be with someone else who would hold her to him. [So] he was afraid because of that dream. And the king did not know what to do to her.

“Un ikh heil zi” (‘And I heal her’) 

 261

Meanwhile, his love for her died away little by little because of the dream, and it constantly weakened, little by little. And as for her as well, her love constantly died little by little [as well], until she came to hate him, and she ran away from him. And the king sent [people] after her to took for her. And they came [back] and told him that she is located in a castle of water. [This is] because there is a castle of water. And there are ten walls, one within another, all of them made of water. And also the ground that people walk upon there within the castle is also made of water. And there are trees and fruits, all made of water. And the beauty of the castle and the great originality of that castle cannot be related, because it is certainly very wondrous and original, since it is a castle made of water. And it is impossible to enter into that castle, because whoever enters it will drown in the water, since it is made entirely of water. And when the (above-mentioned) princess fled, she came to that castle, and she circled the castle of water. And [the people] told the king that she was circling that above-mentioned castle. And the king went with his army to catch her. When the princess saw this, she decided to run into the castle, because she would rather drown in the water than be caught by that king and be with him. And also, perhaps she will be saved, and she will be able to enter the above-mentioned castle of water. When the king saw that she was fleeing into the water, he said: “If that is so….” Therefore, he commanded [his troops] to shoot her. “And if she dies, she dies.” And they shot at her, and all ten types of arrows that were smeared with the ten types of poison (as mentioned above) reached her. And she fled into the above-mentioned castle and entered into it, and passed through the gates in the walls made of water (because there are gates in those above-mentioned walls made of water). And she passed through and entered all ten walls of the castle of water, until she came inside and fell there in a faint. And I heal her (that is, this above-mentioned person without hands). [This is] because a person who does not have all ten types of charity in his hand (as [mentioned] above) cannot enter into all ten walls (as [mentioned] above), because he will drown there in the water. And the king and his army (as [mentioned] above) pursued her and drowned in the water. And I can enter into all ten walls of water (as [mentioned] above). And those walls of water are waves of the sea that stand like a wall. And the winds raise the waves of the sea and make them stand. And those waves that are the ten walls (as [mentioned] above) stand there constantly. But the winds cause the waves to rise and stand. And I can enter into all ten walls (as [mentioned] above) and I can retrieve and draw all ten types of arrows from the princess (mentioned above).

262 

 Arrows and Melodies

And I know all ten types of pulses by means of [my] ten fingers. [This is] because every one of [my] ten fingers knows a particular one of the ten types of pulses. And I can heal her by means of all ten types of melody. And therefore I heal her. So [this shows that] I have such power in my hands (as [mentioned] above). And now I give this to you as a gift. And there was great joy and extraordinary delight.4

The central characteristic of the beggar without hands is his ability to retrieve deadly arrows that have wounded a person, and to heal that person. This wondrous ability parallels the ability discussed in “The Story of the Armor”: “If they shoot very strongly … they will certainly kill [the person]. But how does one [make armor] so that [even] if [the enemy] kills [a person] he will live again, and if they kill him again he will come back to life?” In both cases, someone is wounded by deadly arrows, and the text describes the wondrous ability to undo what has happened and save a person who was apparently beyond help. Rabbi Nachman told “The Story of the Seven Beggars” not long after his talk with Rabbi Aharon and Rabbi Naftali in which he related “The Story of the Armor.” That bolsters the presumption of a connection between the two.5 4 Sipurei Ma’asiyot (“Ma’aseh meihazayin betlers”), pp. 274–281. 5 The time that Rabbi Nachman told “The Story of the Seven Beggars” is known precisely: “The beginning of the narration occurred on the eve of the holy Sabbath, 25 Adar [II], 5560” (Yemei Moharanat, Part 2, 42, p. 65; and see also Chayei Moharan [“Sichot HaShayakhim LeHaTorot,” 59], p. 73). In contrast, the time of the conversation in which Rabbi Nachman told “The Story of the Armor” is not so clear. Rabbi Natan tells that after Parshat Shekalim 5570, on Sunday, he asked Rabbi Nachman which of the psalms one should say in the rectification for a nocturnal emission. Rabbi Nachman refused to divulge the information, and Rabbi Natan returned home. “Soon afterwards,” Rabbi Natan records, Rabbi Nachman revealed the specific psalms to Rabbi Aharon and to Rabbi Naftali; but he does not provide any more details (see Sichot Haran, 141, p. 177). In his biography of Rabbi Natan, Rabbi Chaim Menachem Kramer writes, “About a week after the Rebbe revealed the Ten Psalms of the Tikun HaKlali, he began telling the last and most lofty of his tales, ‘The Seven Beggars’ … on a Shabbos night at the end of Adar (March 30, 1810) (Through Fire and Water, p. 173; and see also p. 598, note 5). Rabbi Eliezer Schick, on the other hand, writes in his P’ulat HaTzaddik that Rabbi Nachman revealed the ten psalms on the Sunday after Parshat Shekalim, 28 Adar I 5570, and he began to relate “The Story of the Seven Beggars” a month later, on 25 Adar II, on Sabbath eve, Parshat Shemini, 5570 (P’ulat HaTzaddik [Jerusalem] 897, p. 585; ibid., 901, p. 592). However, Rabbi Schick’s sources are unknown to me. In any event, whether the intervening span of time was a week or a month, “The Story of the Armor” and “The Story of the Seven Beggars” were told in close proximity to each other, indicating a strong link between them.

“Un ikh heil zi” (‘And I heal her’) 

 263

The story of the beggar without hands may be viewed as a development of the narrative kernel that appears in “The Story of the Armor.” In “The Story of the Armor,” the ability to revive the person who was shot and fatally wounded is discussed briefly and in a theoretical sense, whereas in “The Story of the Sixth Beggar,” the theme is developed into a broad and complete narrative. As I will show further on, the link between these stories is not only in the narrative aspect but in the topic that they both address: the rectification of the erotic realm, the covenant, by means of Rabbi Nachman’s rectification for a nocturnal emission and universal rectification.

From Rabbi Natan’s commentaries on “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” In his Second Introduction to Sipurei Ma’asiyot, Rabbi Natan of Nemirov refers the reader to two sources in his Likutei Halakhot that discuss “The Story of the Sixth Beggar.”6 In these, Rabbi Natan explains that the arrows represent the blemish of the covenant, and that the beggar’s ability to heal the arrows’ effect represents Rabbi Nachman’s rectification consisting of the recitation of ten chapters of psalms, which are the ten types of melody and joy. In Hilkhot Piryah VeRivyah, Rabbi Natan bases his comments on how the military semantic field in the story (bow, shooting arrows and wounding) is analogous to the semantic field in traditional and kabbalistic discourse on sexuality. And with every sin and blemish that a person causes–and in particular, the blemish of the covenant–he actually shoots an arrow into his soul. [This is] because the covenant is called bow and arrows, as is known. For instance, our rabbis (may their memory be for a blessing) state that “any seed that does not shoot [from the man’s body] like an arrow, etc.” … [The beggar] asked [one of the people with him], “Which arrow can you draw back?” That means, “Which blemish of the covenant can you rectify?”… And regarding this, the verse states, “He drew his bow and set me up as a target for the arrow. He caused the arrows of His quiver to enter into my kidneys” (Lamentations 3:12–13). [That is] because all of the evil arrows [that cause] the blemish of the covenant are shot into the Shekhinah and the Congregation of Israel (as is known). That also corresponds to [the verse], “Your arrows pierced me; Your hand bore down heavily on me” (Psalms 38:3).

For a different approach regarding the date on which Rabbi Nachman revealed the ten psalms, see Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, Parpar’ot LeChokhmah HaChadash, Part 2, 92, p. 385. 6 Sipurei Ma’asiyot (“Ma’aseh meihazayin betlers”), p. 20.

264 

 Arrows and Melodies

And so, even though one person boasted that he can extract an arrow, he nevertheless cannot heal the princess, who is the Shekhinah, the entirety of the souls of Israel, since he can only extract one arrow–that is to say, he can only rectify one known blemish of the covenant. But there remain evil arrows that are great blemishes that he cannot extract with rectifications.7

Rabbi Natan’s commentary on “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” complements and supports my explanation of “The Story of the Armor.” In both stories, the war refers to a war against the evil inclination, the arrows are blemishes of the covenant and the seed that shoots like an arrow, and the goal is to undo that which was already done–i.e., to rectify the blemish of the covenant after the arrows were shot and caused fatal damage. As Yehudah Liebes has noted,8 the rectification of which Rabbi Natan speaks (in an interpretation that is well-anchored in the symbology of the story) is not limited to that of an individual but encompasses the scope of the national congregation of Israel and, moreover, the cosmic, universal scope of the rectification of the Shekhinah. However, it is also important to note that the rectification initially exists as a rectification of an individual soul, which is represented by the princess, dealing with the fact that with an individual’s every blemish of the covenant he “shoots an arrow into his soul.” Consequently, in a wider circle of influence, the wound affects the princess, who is now described as “the Shekhinah, the entirety of the souls of Israel … because all of the evil arrows of the blemish of the covenant are shot into the Shekhinah and the Congregation of Israel (as is known).” Later on, I will return to these ideas and see what may be derived from them regarding the question of whether the rectification bears a messianic character–and, if so, what that implies about the nature of messianism. In both “The Story of the Armor” and “The Story of the Sixth Beggar,” the person who possesses this extraordinary ability is Rabbi Nachman himself. That is clear in “The Story of the Armor,” for the story is told in the framework of a conversation about the ten psalms that Rabbi Nachman revealed, which are a rectification that revives whoever has been wounded by the arrows of the blemish of the covenant. As for “The Story of the Sixth Beggar,” Rabbi Natan explains that Rabbi Nachman possesses the ability to heal the princess–the soul and the Shekhinah–with the aid of his rectifications. As Rabbi Natan writes in Hilkhot Tola’im: The crux [of the story] is that the princess corresponds to the souls of Israel, which are called a princess…. The king who captured her is the evil inclination, corresponding to “an old and foolish king” (Ecclesiastes 4:13). 7 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 6 (“Even Ha’Ezer: Hilkhot Piryah VeRivyah V’Ishut,” 3:10), p. 22. 8 Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” pp. 254–255.

“Un ikh heil zi” (‘And I heal her’) 

 265

[This king] saw in a dream that [the princess] would kill him. [The evil inclination] sees and understands that ultimately the souls of Israel will overcome him and kill him and remove him from the world…. And in this way the love between [the king and princess] was ruined … until she fled from him … and the king took all of his soldiers and pursued her. [That means] that the evil inclination gathers all of his soldiers and pursues the Jewish soul…. And [the princess] fell faint because of the poison evil arrows that [the king] shot into her. And he–the one without hands who had wondrous power in his hands–heals her. And the essential mechanism of her healing comes about by means of the ten types of melody, which correspond to joy. As the verse states, “Upon a ten-stringed harp and upon a psaltery …, for You have made me joyful, Lord, with Your work” (Psalms 92–4–5)…. [This is] because the essential [effect] of the arrows–the increased strength of the Sitra Achra–is propelled by depression…. [That is] because the essence of the evil inclination’s burgeoning strength inheres in the blemish of the covenant, heaven forbid…. And the essence of sexual desire and the blemish of the covenant results from depression (as I heard from our rebbe [may his memory be for a blessing] and as may be found numerous times in his words). And so the husk that overcomes [a person] with a blemish of the covenant is called Lilith, because of the [accompanying] wailing (yelalah) and depression. And therefore our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) established ten chapters of psalms as a rectification of the covenant. [Those ten chapters] correspond to ten types of melody, which corresponds to joy.9

Rabbi Natan’s identification of the sixth beggar with Rabbi Nachman relies on other elements in the story as well. Thus, for example, one of the qualities that the beggar without hands possesses is that “he gives to whomever he takes and receives from (meaning that in the very taking and receiving he gives, because his receiving is giving).” A parallel passage in Sichot Haran quotes Rabbi Nachman as boasting: “From whomever I take and receive money and the like, I give him, because in that receiving, I give.” And Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin, who published Sichot Haran, adds in a note: “And that is the same as the incident in ‘The Story of the Sixth Day’ from ‘The Seven Beggars,’ when one person boasted of the wondrous power of his hand.”10 The ability to know every type of pulse and all of the types of balance affecting spirit and melody that revive and heal a person is nothing other than the ability to know the identity of the ten chapters of psalms, which are same as the ten types of melody and joy that heal a person from all of his spiritual and physi9 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 4 (“Yoreh Deah: Hilkhot Tola’im,” 4:2), p. 162. 10 Sichot Haran, 150, p. 192; Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 432, note 15.

266 

 Arrows and Melodies

cal maladies. And that is the ability that Rabbi Nachman demonstrated when he revealed the ten psalms for a rectification for a nocturnal emission and for the universal rectification performed at his grave.

The uniqueness of the sixth beggar and the uniqueness of the universal rectification The beggar’s words emphasize that his uniqueness does not inhere in the ability to give charity, to draw back an arrow or to understand the pulse and the balance of spirit and melody. These are qualities that his fellow-beggars also boasted of having. Rather, he is unique in that he can utilize all ten types of arrow, ten types of charity, and ten types of pulse and melody, and thus resolve all blemishes. This description appears to characterize the universal rectification more than it does the rectification for a nocturnal emission. As was discussed in Chapter 4, whereas the rectification for a nocturnal emission is intended to rectify a specific blemish (i.e., a nocturnal emission), the universal rectification is designed to provide an inclusive solution for all sins and blemishes (although particularly emphasizing blemishes of the covenant). The universal rectification proposed by the sixth beggar includes the ten types of melody and joy that parallel Rabbi Nachman’s choice of ten chapters of psalms. The use of the ten types of melody in the universal rectification is particularly apt for the universal rectification performed by means of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, since this universal rectification includes the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms (as opposed to Rabbi Nachman’s original formulation of the universal rectification, which involves reciting the Shema with one’s eyes closed–see Chapter 4). According to this understanding, “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” could only have been told after Rabbi Nachman established the rectification to be performed by pilgrimage to his grave and after a link was forged between the universal rectification and the ten psalms (as was discussed in detail in Chapter 4). And indeed (as was pointed out earlier), “The Story of the Seven Beggars” was told a short while after the conversation between Rabbi Nachman and Rabbi Naftali and Rabbi Aharon, in which Rabbi Nachman revealed that “the above-mentioned rectification–to be at his grave–is the universal rectification,” and that one of the components of this universal rectification is the recitation of the ten psalms. As will be discussed below, the chronological proximity between these two is not incidental.

“Un ikh heil zi” (‘And I heal her’) 

 267

“That everything is one and all is one connection”11 There is a close link joining Rabbi Nachman’s revelation of the ten psalms and his establishment of the pilgrimage to his grave with “The Story of the Seven Beggars”–in particular, its conclusion in “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” who heals the princess. That link is stated emphatically by Rabbi Natan, as quoted in a letter written by his dedicated student, Rabbi Nachman of Tulchyn: [Rabbi Natan said:] “And immediately afterward, [Rabbi Nachman] revealed the rectification of ten psalms in detail and at that time committed himself for generations [to come] with a great promise, before reliable witnesses, that he will stand to help us always, forever, whoever will come to his holy and awesome grave, etc. And immediately afterwards, with the greatest reverence, he told the awesome tale of the seven beggars. “And immediately afterwards, following Passover, he traveled to Uman.” And [regarding] all of this, our teacher and our rabbi, Moharanat [Rabbi Natan] (may his memory be for a blessing), revealed hints that everything is one and all is one connection and included in the expression un haynt (‘and today’). [This is because] in a holy manner [as Rabbi Natan spoke] he drew out [the phrase] un haynt sweetly. [He said,] “Un haynt we must reveal the particular psalms and publicize the promise (mentioned above), un haynt we must tell the story (mentioned above), with the conclusion, ‘Un ikh heil zi–and I heal her,’ un haynt we must travel to Uman and establish the site of [Rabbi Nachman’s] holiness for all generations in Uman.”12

Rabbi Natan here claims the existence of a close connection linking the revelation of the ten psalms and the rectification of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave (including its specific promise) with “The Story of the Seven Beggars”–in particular, its concluding words (which are the concluding words of “The Story of the Sixth Beggar”). And he sees a link between these three components together and Rabbi Nachman’s decision to move to Uman as part of his preparations for his death, including his decision to be buried in the cemetery there.13 What is the continuum linking these three apparently separate occurrences implied by Rabbi Natan’s repeated use of the phrase, un haynt (‘and today’)? 11 Alim LiTrufah, p. 215b. 12 Ibid. 13 Regarding the passage from Bratslav to Uman as a process in which Rabbi Nachman prepares himself and his Hasidim for the last chapter in his life, see Piekarz, “Parshat Uman bechayei Rebbe Nachman miBreslav,” Chasidut Breslav, pp. 21–55; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 252–265. The following chapter is dedicated to this topic.

268 

 Arrows and Melodies

What is the meaning of his statement that “everything is one and all is one connection”? Apparently Rabbi Nachman revealed and instituted his rectification for a nocturnal emission long before then and not “un haynt.” In the light of what I have written earlier, the meaning is clear. Until now, the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms had functioned solely as part of a local rectification for a nocturnal emission, without any connection to the universal rectification. Now, and only now, Rabbi Nachman combined them into a ritual of pilgrimage to his grave, so that the recitation could serve as part of the universal rectification. Only after this occurred could Rabbi Nachman tell “The Story of the Seven Beggars” and conclude (at the end of “The Story of the Sixth Beggar”), “Un ikh heil zi–‘And I heal her.’” Only now, after he had revealed the ten chapters of psalms and combined them with a ritual of pilgrimage to his grave, yielding a complete rectification that retrieves the ten poisoned arrows and heals the wound that they caused by means of the ten types of melody and ten types of pulse–both associated with life and joy–could he testify of himself, in the figure of the beggar without hands, that “Un ikh heil zi–‘And I heal her.’” Only now, after he fashioned the ritual pilgrimage to his grave as a way of connecting to him after his death, nothing remained for him but to concern himself with the particular place where he would pass away and where he would establish his holiness for all generations to come. And this place has indeed been transformed into a center of pilgrimage for tens of thousands, both Hasidim and non-Hasidim, who come to receive a cure and rectification from the great healer who has the power to remedy all sorts of pain and blemishes by means of joy and the ten types of melody–the healer who testified of himself, “Un ikh heil zi–‘And I heal her.’”

2 Melodies and arrows: more on the midrashic and kabbalistic underpinning of the rectifications and stories Throughout our discussion of the formation of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications and our discussion of “The Story of the Armor,” I cited many midrashic and kabbalistic texts that served as a foundation for Rabbi Nachman’s words and rectifications. Here I would like to cite additional sources that inform Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications. These sources are important not only because they demonstrate how deeply the rectifications are implanted in the kabbalistic semantic field, but because they deepen our understanding of the rectifications’ character and purpose. In addition, the revelation of the rectifications’ kabbalistic underpin-



Melodies and arrows 

 269

nings reveals new aspects of Rabbi Nachman’s self-awareness as a “righteous foundation of the world” (Proverbs 10:25) upon whom the rectification of humanity and the world depend. These sources play another important role as well, in that their revelation renders moot conjectures of a purported connection between the universal rectification and Sabbatianism. Some academics have pointed out a Sabbatian manuscript that uses the term “universal rectification”14 and which includes the recitation of ten chapters of psalms, and have speculated that it serves as the basis for Rabbi Nachman’s idea that rectifying the covenant by reciting ten psalms is a universal rectification, as well as his use of the term, “universal rectification.” According to this conjecture, Rabbi Nachman wanted to rectify Sabbatianism by adopting the central model of the Sabbatian rectification in order to raise and purify it from the problematical dimensions associated with it.15 Besides many difficulties that inhere in this conjecture,16 clarification of the rich kabbalistic sources that inform the rectification renders moot the conjecture that it is sourced in a single Sabbatian manuscript, one that was not published in Rabbi Nachman’s day and that Rabbi Nachman had absolutely no opportunity to see. Rather, as I will show further on, the totality of the components of the semantic, ideational and literary field from which Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications flowered is the classic kabbalistic field of the zoharic literature, the writings of the Ari and the ethical kabbalistic literature, which were available to Rabbi Nachman and which he had mastered. I will begin by discussing the basic understructure that contributes to understanding the rectification of the covenant as a universal rectification in an ideational and conceptual context. Afterwards, I will discuss the underpinnings of the recitation of ten chapters of psalms as a rectification for a nocturnal emission and as a component of the universal rectification performed on pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave.

14 “I did not find the term ‘universal rectification’ in any source prior to Natan of Gaza” (Liebes, “Hatikun haklali,” p. 241). 15 See Liebes, “Hatikun haklali.” 16 See Mondshine, “Al ‘Hatikun haklali’”; and see also Chapter 6, above, which is dedicated to “The Story of the Armor.”

270 

 Arrows and Melodies

“The universal rectification” Beginning with his first discourse that mentions the universal rectification (“BeKarov Alai M’rei’im”17), Rabbi Nachman describes it as relating specifically to the erotic realm, the “rectification of the covenant.” Yet at the same time it serves as a universal rectification that rectifies all of a person’s sins. Notable sources of the view that rectification of the erotic realm constitutes the rectification of everything, and also of the term, “the universal rectification,” are found in the zoharic literature and in the ethical kabbalah literature. The incipient beginnings of this viewpoint appear in texts from the earliest stages of the kabbalah that describe the functions and names of the ten sefirot. These sources clearly state that Joseph, who withstood the erotic temptations of Potiphar’s wife, is identified with the sefirah of yesod, the sefirah that represents the male organ, and one of whose standard terms is kol–‘all.’18 This theme is especially pronounced in the zoharic literature and in the ethical kabbalah literature. The Zohar (Parshat Pekudei) states:19 Joseph the tzaddik–he is the perfection of all, he takes all, because all is rectified for his sake…. And so the verse states, “The tzaddik is the ‘foundation’ (yesod) of the world.”20 And this world stands on that foundation…. And when he is rectified, all is rectified.21 22

Here, not only does the term “all” refer to the sefirah of yesod, but the claim is made that the rectification of the covenant, which is the trait of yesod–associated with Yosef the tzaddik–is the rectification of “all.” When yesod is rectified, then all is rectified. This statement does not just appear one time. It is an oft-repeated zoharic motif expressed in many sources and in a variety of ways. Another zoharic passage (in Parshat VaYakhel) describes the extreme gravity of the blemish of the covenant and the harsh punishment that this sin incurs, following which the Zohar qualifies its words by stating, “And these [harsh consequences occur] when a person has not engaged in complete teshuvah, teshuvah that is capable of covering all of his [evil] deeds.”23 Here the principle that the rectification of the covenant constitutes the rectification of all appears as a demand and requirement, for only the rectification 17 Likutei Moharan I 36. 18 See regarding this Hallamish, An Introduction to the Kabbalah, pp. 136–137. 19 Unless otherwise stated, all of the emphases in this passage are mine (Zvi Mark). 20 Proverbs 10:25. 21 Zohar, Part 2 (“Parshat Pekudei”), pp. 258a–258b. 22 The translation is based on Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh, Volume 6, pp. 433–434. 23 Zohar, Part 2 (“Parshat VaYakhel”), p. 214b.



Melodies and arrows 

 271

of the covenant–which includes repentance and rectification of all of a person’s deeds–can nullify the harsh ramifications of the blemish of the covenant. It is thus clear that Rabbi Nachman’s description of the rectification of the covenant as a universal rectification is a direct development of the zoharic viewpoint and language. This zoharic outlook is repeatedly expressed in the ethical kabbalistic literature. Thus, Rabbi Eliyahu de Vidas, the preeminent student of Rabbi Moshe Cordovero, writes in his Reishit Chokhmah: And a person needs [to engage in] perfect repentance in order to cover all of his [evil] deeds because the trait–[i.e., the sefirah–associated with the] tzaddik, [that being the sefirah of yesod,] is called “all,” [indicating] that all of the traits–[i.e., sefirot]–are included in it (as explained in the Tikunim).24 And just as the name Havayah [the Tetragrammaton] is the root of all [Divine] names (as is known), so too the covenant is the essence that maintains all the body. And a person who blemishes it is literally considered as though he blemishes Havayah, which includes all of the traits [sefirot]. And therefore, that person needs [to engage in] repentance that is capable of “covering all of his [evil] deeds.” That is, he has, as it were, blemished all of his limbs, and all of his deeds have been blemished. And by means of this repentance he will rectify all.25

In his Shenei Luchot HaBrit, Rabbi Yeshayahu Horowitz quotes these words of the Reishit Chokhmah and explains why rectifying the covenant is not localized but demands that a person engage in a universal rectification of all of his sins. And the reason appears to be that in regard to all sins, in the most superior repentance the sinner rectifies the sin that he had committed. “And where he willfully sinned, there he rectifies.”… But the seed … is the root and source of the entire structure of a person, and from that seed the person is composed…. And he must bring about a rectification for all of his structure…. At any rate, he must add to that [local repentance] and engage in repentance for all of his limbs, as though he had sinned with them all, because in truth this includes them all.26

Thus, the zoharic literature and the principal texts of ethical kabbalistic literature–which were well-known to Hasidim, including Rabbi Nachman27–express 24 Reishit Chokhmah, Part 2 (“Sha’ar HaKedushah”), Chapter 17, pp. 906–907. 25 Ibid., p. 908. 26 Shenei Luchot HaBrit (“Sha’ar Ha’Oti’ot”), 70a. 27 “[Rabbi Nachman] said explicitly that he learned the book Reishit Chokhmah numberless times” (Shivchei Haran, 7, p.  9). Regarding the widespread use that Hasidim made of Shenei Luchot HaBrit, see Piekarz, BImei Tzemichat HaChasidut, pp. 209–219.

272 

 Arrows and Melodies

the view that the rectification of the covenant is essential to a person’s universal rectification of all of his sins. And linguistically there is a usage of the terms for repentance and rectification of the covenant that naturally tends to the term, “universal rectification.”

Ten chapters of psalms: ten drops of the seed and ten types of melody ** The midrashic foundation The Talmudic sages interpret Jacob’s deathbed blessing of Joseph as referring to Joseph’s rejection of his attempted seductress, Potiphar’s wife. As discussed in the previous chapter, these verses with their midrashic interpretations provide an important foundation for the semantic erotic-military theme in “The Story of the Armor” and “The Story of the Sixth Beggar.” These midrashim express the view that although Joseph withstood the test and fled Potiphar’s wife, he did not entirely avoid spilling seed in vain. “But his bow was firm”28–meaning, Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Meir, that he strengthened himself [and overcame his urge]. Nevertheless, “And the arms [zir’ei] of his hands were bedecked [vayafozu] with gold”29–[this means that] he thrust his hands into the ground [in order to distract himself with pain,] but his semen [zera] issued [paz] from his fingernails.30

The Bible tells that Joseph had two sons, Menashe and Ephraim, both of whom became the founders of tribes. The Talmud in the passage quoted above references a baraita that Joseph might have fathered another ten sons to become founders of tribes as well, but since his seed issued from his ten fingers, he lost that merit. We learned in a baraita: Joseph was worth of having 12 tribes issue from him, just as [12 tribes] had issued from Jacob his father. As the verse states, “These are the offspring of Jacob: Joseph” (Genesis 37:2), [indicating a similarity between Jacob and Joseph]. But seed issued from his fingernails. But nevertheless [ten sons (in addition to the two of Joseph] issued from [Joseph’s] brother, Benjamin, all of whom are named in reference to [Joseph]. As the verse states, “And the sons of Benjamin were Bela and Becher and Ashbel,” etc. (Genesis 46:21).

28 Genesis 49:24. 29 Ibid. 30 b. Sotah 36b.



Melodies and arrows 

 273

“Bela” [means “swallowed”–he was so named in order to note that Joseph] was swallowed up among the nations [when he was sold into slavery]. “And Becher” [means “first-born”–he was so named in order to note that Joseph] was the first-born to his mother….31

Rashi comments that Benjamin fathered the ten sons who were denied Joseph: “Those ten that were deducted from Joseph [due to the semen issuing from] his ten fingers issued from Benjamin his brother.” A similar passage exists in Pirkei DeRebbe Eliezer: The seed of 12 tribes should have issued from Joseph. But the seed of ten tribes issued from the tips of his fingers. As the verse states, “And the arms of his hands were bedecked with gold.” But [only] two [sons] remained [to Joseph]: Menashe and Ephraim.32

** Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69) A description of the emergence of the seed from Joseph’s fingers appears as well in the Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69): And Joseph sinned with the [letter] yod, [which has the numerical value of ten]. That is the meaning of the verse, “But his bow was firm and the arms of his hands were bedecked with gold.” What is [the meaning of] “were bedecked with gold”? That a drop, which is [analogous to the] yod, shot between [Joseph’s] ten fingers and divided into ten sparks that were shot from the bow, which is the covenant.33 34

Joseph’s bow of the covenant shot forth ten sparks of seed like an arrow, which scattered among his ten fingers. These sources comprise a significant background to Rabbi Nachman’s determination that the number of psalms that is to be recited to rectify the blemish of spilling seed in vain is ten. Ten is an exact and meaningful number in relation to spilling seed in vain. Thus Joseph, whose seed issued from his ten fingers,35 lost the possibility of having ten additional tribes issue from him. There are other strong, clear links that connect the number ten not only with Joseph’s blemish but also with the means of rectifying that blemish. The same 31 Ibid. 32 Pirkei DeRebbe Eliezer (5743), Chapter 39, pp. 148–149. 33 Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69), p. 110a. 34 Translation based on Tikunei Zohar Im Targum, p. 580. 35 It is noteworthy that the word “finger” serves the Talmudic sages as a euphemism for the male organ. See b. Nidah 66a.

274 

 Arrows and Melodies

passage from the Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69) cites the number ten (this time again in relation to the ten fingers) as relevant to rectifying and healing blemishes of the covenant: He began by speaking [of the following verse]: “I am asleep, but my heart is awake.”36 “I am asleep” because my beloved is far from me. “But my heart is awake” when he comes to me. This is comparable to a bride who was married to a bridegroom, who distanced himself from her. She fell [ill,] in the house of sickness. And all of the physicians came to her, but they could not identify her illness. A wise physician was there who knew the [science of the] pulse, the ten types of pulses that a physician must examine, corresponding to the ten fingers. And only he identified her disease … when [he,] the wise physician, came [and] examined her pulse. And she recognized the physician and said, “Hark! My beloved knocks [dofek–which may also be translated as ‘pulses’].”37 And he said, “Open for me.”38 Open the letter yod, which [corresponds to the] ten types of pulse.39 40

This passage contains a dense aggregate of motifs that may easily be identified as an ideational and literary source and foundation of “The Story of the Sixth Beggar.” The passage describes a young woman (who is the soul and the Shekhinah) who has lost consciousness, physicians who do not know how to heal her, and one wise physician who alone knows the ten types of pulse of the ten fingers, and who alone can heal her. Moreover, the idea that the ten types of melody in Psalms are the rectification with whose help the physician heals the ten types of pulse of the Shekhinah/soul who was distanced from her groom is stated explicitly in that passage from the Tikunei Zohar: And when the Shekhinah is in exile, the verse states of her, “I am asleep, but my heart is awake.”41 When she sleeps, she has no pulse….

36 Song of Songs 5:2. 37 Ibid. 38 Ibid. 39 Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69), p. 106a. 40 Translation based on Tikunei Zohar Im Targum, p 557. 41 Song of Songs 5:2.



Melodies and arrows 

 275

And at the time she has no pulse, which is analogous to vowel marks [in Hebrew orthography] that vowelize the pulse of the fingers, which are ten, in which there is vowelization with the pulse of the spirit. And these are vowelized upon the strings of the harp of David. Pulse is analogous to the sound that rises in melody. Parallel to the ten pulses that the physician examines in the pulse, David made ten types of melodies in Psalms.42 43

This combination of components in Tikun 69 creates an account filled with an array of details, all of which play a central role in Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications and in his stories that relate to those rectifications. The ten types of melody of Psalms correspond to the ten types of pulse lacking in the Shekhinah, which is in the sleep of exile and distance from her Husband. Only the physician who is conversant with the ten types of pulse and the ten types of melody in Psalms can heal the princess (the Shekhinah and soul). Thus, this passage of the Tikunei Zohar clearly constitutes a foundation for Rabbi Nachman’s view regarding the power of psalms to rectify, utilizing the ten types of melody and joy incorporated within them. This is in keeping with Rabbi Nachman’s explanation (in Likutei Moharan II 95) of the rectification for a nocturnal emission: “Ten chapters of psalms correspond to ten types of melody, of which the book of Psalms is composed.”

From mythos to ethos; from mythos to rectification and ritual In his rectifications that utilize the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms, Rabbi Nachman transformed the Tikunei Zohar’s narrative parable of a young woman along with its interpretation into a practical rectification. He transformed the zoharic mythos into an ethos regarding the power of the rectifying and healing power of joy. He transformed the zoharic mythos about the Shekhinah into a practical and ritualistic rectification consisting of the recitation of ten chapters of psalms, which correspond to ten types of melody that rectify and heal the ten types of pulse that were harmed by the arrows of the blemish of the covenant. Rabbi Nachman plays the role of “the wise physician” whom no one ever preceded, who knows how to determine which psalms to recite in order to express most correctly the ten types of joy that can contend with the ten types of arrows, and therefore heal and return the pulse of life in its ten categories to the fallen princess: the soul and Shekhinah. “Un haynt we must reveal the particular psalms

42 Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69), p. 105a. 43 Translation based on Tikunei Zohar Im Targum, p. 553.

276 

 Arrows and Melodies

and make the promise (mentioned above), un haynt we must tell the story (mentioned above), which concludes, ‘Un ikh heil zi’–‘and I heal her.’”44 The connection linking the ten types of melody and joy with the ten types of pulse, and the connection of the ten types of pulse with health and illness, are described by Rabbi Nachman in Likutei Moharan II 24, which also discusses the power of joy and its healing power45: It is a great mitzvah to be joyful always…. And all diseases that a person experiences come only due to damage [caused] to joy. [This is] because there are ten types of melody, which correspond to joy. As the verse states, “Upon a ten-stringed, etc., for You have made me joyful, Lord, with Your work, etc.”46 And these ten types of melody enter into the ten types of pulses, and give them life…. And so when there is [any] damage and blemish in joy, which corresponds to the ten types of melody, diseases come from the ten types of pulses that had been damaged by the damage to the ten types of melody, which are joy (as [mentioned] above). [This is] because all types of disease are incorporated into the ten types of pulses. And similarly, all types of melodies are incorporated into the ten types of melody. And according to the damage in joy and melody, so comes the disease (mentioned above). And the expert physicians have spoken about this at length, [teaching] that all disease comes about by means of the black bile and depression, and that joy is a great remedy.47

Rabbi Nachman does not mention Tikunei Zohar in this discourse. Nevertheless, it is absolutely clear that Tikun 69 informs Rabbi Nachman’s linkage of the ten types of melody and joy with the ten types of pulse that represent disease and health. The symbolic composite of Tikun 69 forms the basis and background to Likutei Moharan II 24, as well as to “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” and to Rabbi Nachman’s words regarding the power of the ten types of melodies and joy to rectify the blemish of a nocturnal emission (which is rooted in the activity of Lilith, the husk whose entire nature is wailing and depression, and which is responsible for nocturnal emissions and spilling seed in vain).48 Rabbi Nachman therefore has clear zoharic roots to his view that the rectification does not need to be performed by means of self-mortification and self-imposed suffering but may be performed by means of strengthening joy and perfect-

44 Alim LiTrufah, p. 215b. 45 In the “hints” that appear after the story, the reader is referred to this discourse. 46 Psalms 92:4. 47 Likutei Moharan II 24. 48 See above, Chapter 4, regarding the formation of the rectifications.



Melodies and arrows 

 277

ing all ten languages of joy, and the melody that characterizes joy. Strengthening joy is the great remedy and rectification, for “joy is a great remedy.” In the following chapter, I will discuss the connection linking the rectifications with the site where Rabbi Nachman yearned to rest eternally, Uman, whose cemetery Rabbi Nachman saw as a most fitting site for people to engage in the rectification to be performed at his grave, the site to which generations of Hasidim would make pilgrimage in order to increase joy and receive rectification and healing.

Chapter Eight Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul” Un haynt (‘and today’) we must travel to Uman and establish the site of [Rabbi Nachman’s] holiness for all generations in Uman.1

1 Uman and the enterprise of the rectifications In Chayei Moharan and Yemei Moharanat, Rabbi Natan describes at length Rabbi Nachman’s residence in Uman. In addition, other details about this period–in particular, about his relationship with Uman’s maskilim–are brought to light in later Bratslav writings that were published at the beginning of the twentieth century.2 Important studies have been written about this chapter in Rabbi Nachman’s life, focusing on his relations with the maskilim and on his desire to be buried in the cemetery in Uman because it was the resting place of many Jews who had been martyred in the Gonta massacre of 1768.3 These studies have also addressed Rabbi Nachman’s desire to dedicate this period of his life to rectifying the souls of the dead.4 This chapter will discuss other aspects of Rabbi Nachman’s residence in Uman, particularly with the intent to demonstrate that his decision to be buried in Uman constituted a component of his enterprise of rectifications, for which he found Uman’s cemetery to be especially conducive. As noted in the previous chapter, Rabbi Natan presented three elements as being associated with each other, claiming that “everything is one, and all is one connection”: Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, “The Story of the Sixth Beggar,” and Rabbi Nachman’s move to Uman. Simply understood, Rabbi Nachman’s move to Uman was the culmination of a process that involved the other two elements. In establishing the rectification to be performed at his grave and then alluding to its meaning in “The Story of the Sixth Beggar,” he completed the preparations for

1 Alim LiTrufah, p. 215b. 2 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiato VIshivato B’Umin,” 185–229), pp. 212–250; Yemei Moharanat, Part 2, 44–66, pp. 68–96; Kokhavei Ohr (“Sipurim Niflaim: Hitnahagut Admor Zatzal Im Ha’Aristokratin SheB’Umin”), pp. 3–10. 3 See Dubnow, History of the Jews, p. 89. 4 “Madua Kava Rebbe Nachman MiBreslav Moshavo B’Uman?” Ohel Rachel, Volume 1, pp. 69–73; “Rebbe Nachman MiBreslav UMaskilei Uman,” Ohel Rachel, Volume 3, pp. 310–338; Weiss, “HaPerek Ha’Acharon BeChayei Rebbe Nachman,” Mechkarim, pp.  61–65; Piekarz, “Parshat Uman BeChayei Rebbe Nachman MiBreslav,” Chasidut Breslav, pp.  21–55; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 258–266; Travis, “Adorning the souls of the dead.”



Uman and the enterprise of the rectifications 

 279

his death and fulfilled his mission; he now could allow himself to move to Uman “to pass away there.”5 The locale of Uman had particular meaning as the site where Rabbi Nachman must be buried and where his promise to all who go on pilgrimage to his grave and perform his rectification would be realized. Rabbi Nachman’s decision to be buried in Uman was preceded by many conflicted thoughts and resolutions, which demonstrate how pregnant with meaning this judgment was. After Passover, [Rabbi Nachman] moved from here [Bratslav] to Uman in order to pass away there…. During all of these three years, he had spoken a great deal about his passing away…. And he spoke with us a number of times about his burial site, so that it was clear from his words that he was seeking and inquiring and thinking about choosing the place where he would be buried, but couldn’t find a place to be buried in accordance with his desire. He spoke with us about a few places. He said that he thought that it would be good to be buried in Lemberg, because great tzaddikim are buried there, but for the above-mentioned reason it was not good in his estimation. Nor did he think that here–Bratslav–was a good place to be buried. And he spoke in this way a number of times until he came to Uman. Then he said that in his estimation Uman would be a good place in which to pass away, because many martyrs were at rest there.6

A few pages later, Rabbi Natan explicitly and emphatically affirms the connection between Rabbi Nachman’s decision to be buried in Uman and his rectifications: “The Lord made everything beautiful in its time” (Ecclesiastes 3:11). It is impossible for me to express in writing everything in my heart regarding this. [That is] because regarding [Rabbi Nachman’s] move to Uman … many worlds, beyond number, and the merit of Israel for generations, depended on this …. And also, this resulted in a number of benefits on behalf of Israel for eternity, for generations. [We know this] because [Rabbi Nachman] revealed that when a person comes to his grave and recites these ten chapters of psalms that have now been published, [Rabbi Nachman] will certainly help that person forever, no matter what he may be like (as is known and publicized). And [Rabbi Nachman’s] move to Uman was a beginning and preparation of all of these rectifications, [which will last] for all time. [That is] because the site of his burial place was chosen to be in Uman. And it was [precisely] there that he had to involve himself with all of the above-mentioned rectifications.7 5 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiato VIshivato B’Umin,” 187), p. 214. 6 Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 41, pp. 64–65. 7 Ibid., 46, pp. 70–71.

280 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

Uman was thus chosen from the beginning as the most fitting location for the rectification that will be performed by a pilgrim to Rabbi Nachman’s grave who recites the ten chapters of psalms that Rabbi Nachman chose. Rabbi Nachman’s choice of Uman was the beginning of and preparation for all of those [future] rectifications. Below I will consider Uman’s particular connection with these rectifications, and whether that connection is related to the fact that Uman is the resting place of many martyrs. In this context, I will attempt to reveal another stratum of the kabbalistic foundations of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, and with that to delve into the meaning of the role of the great physician that Rabbi Nachman undertook with the aid of his rectifications. But first I will briefly address Rabbi Nachman’s singular and personal approach to the topic of dying in sanctification of God’s Name, and its application to the martyrs buried in the cemetery in Uman.

2 “He requested of the Lord, may He be blessed, that he may die in sanctification of [God’s] Name”: Rabbi Nachman and dying in sanctification of God’s name8 Joseph Weiss has discussed the important role that the topic of dying in sanctification of God’s Name played in Rabbi Nachman’s outlook–particularly, when he was a youth. Weiss also revealed Rabbi Nachman’s deep existential perspectives and ideas regarding this topic.9 The meaning of this topic in Rabbi Nachman’s life and spiritual world can only be fully understood by taking into account its kabbalistic and mystical context–in particular, its connection to Rabbi Nachman’s conception of himself as a person on the level of Messiah son of Joseph. However, before I address Rabbi Nachman’s messianic awareness, I will take a brief look at his youth and the central role that sanctification of God’s Name played in his life–particularly, in his religious devotions:

8 Michael Fishbane has dealt extensively with yearning for death by a Divine kiss and with dying in sanctification of God’s name. See Fishbane, The Kiss of God. Regarding these goals in Hasidism, see ibid., pp.  46–50. Regarding Rabbi Joseph Caro on the desire to die in sanctification of God’s name and its influence on the Baal Shem Tov and Hasidism, see Elior, “R. Yosef Caro vehaBesht,” pp. 674–675, 699–701. 9 Weiss, “Kiddush HaShem UMitat Korban,” Mechkarim, pp. 172–178. This study has served as a fruitful source of my ideas, as expressed in the following sections.



“He requested of the Lord, … in sanctification of [God’s] Name” 

 281

[Rabbi Nachman] related that in his youth he had an enormous fear of death, that he was very frightened of dying. And then he requested of the Lord, may He be blessed, that he may die in sanctification of God’s name. And he proceeded in this way for a long time. He does not remember how long, but he knows that it was a great amount of time. It is possible that he proceeded in this way and constantly asked for this over the course of a year. There wasn’t a single conversation [with God] or prayer in which he did not request this: to pass away in sanctification of God’s Name. And his praying for death, of which he had such great fear and terror at that time (as stated above), was itself actual self-sacrifice in sanctification of God’s Name, because at that time his fear of this was so intense.10

Thus, death in sanctification of God’s name was not something theoretical in Rabbi Nachman’s life, but his focus and the subject of his prayers for a substantial period of time. Over the course of approximately a year, Rabbi Nachman did not engage in even one prayer or conversation with God in which he did not raise this request. And it is well-known that in his youth he prayed a great deal, and very often went out into the fields to engage in hitbodedut, spontaneous “conversation” with his Maker.11 Dying in sanctification of God’s name was part of a broader pursuit of Rabbi Nachman in regard to death: [Rabbi Nachman] said that a number of times he envisioned [his] death as though he were literally dying, until he literally felt the taste of death. I also heard that he said that in his youth he envisioned his death and how people would cry for him, etc., and he envisioned clearly all of the details of death. And he said that visualizing this clearly is a skill.12

In his youth, Rabbi Nachman did not satisfy himself with imagining death but accustomed himself to purposefully bring himself to the threshold of actual death in order to reach the awareness that “a person is in great danger in this world,”13 and to serve God in this sober existential state. Further on, I will show that Rabbi 10 Sichot Haran, 57, p. 72. 11 See Chayei Moharan (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 107 [4]), p. 140. 12 Sichot Haran, 190, pp. 237–238. 13 In the village of Ossatin … flows a large river…. It was the holy custom of the admor (may the memory of a holy tzaddik be for a blessing) to occasionally go out on a small boat and sail by himself on the river…. Regarding that above-mentioned boat that he took into the river, he did not know how to navigate the boat. And when he was on the river far from land, he had no idea what to do, and the boat strayed and almost capsized, heaven forbid. Then he cried out to the Lord, may He be blessed, and lifted his hands to Him as is proper. (Similarly, when he was hanging by his hands from the wall in Tiberias when he wanted to flee the plague, may the Compassionate One protect us, etc., and he saw the Sea of Kinneret below him and he almost fell [as is

282 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

Nachman’s practice of imagining death, which began in his youth, continued throughout his adult years. This demanding ideal to die in sanctification of God’s name might have weakened Rabbi Nachman’s resolve and diverted him from his mission, for it appears that at a certain stage he realized that he was not succeeding, and that his many prayers were returning unfulfilled. But Rabbi Nachman created alternative frameworks in which it would be possible to realize his yearning to sacrifice himself in sanctification of God’s name without literally dying. In this way, although his yearning to die in sanctification of God’s name was not realized in a physical sense, it reached the verge of death and provided the taste of death (as will be discussed further on).

3 Self-sacrifice via the faculty of thought and imagination14 One alternative framework is that of imagination and thought. As noted above, Rabbi Nachman made use of this in his youth, when he visualized all of the

described elsewhere in the narrative of his journey to the land of Israel], he cried out in his heart to the Lord, be He blessed, as is proper.) And he used to tell this with the intent of making us aware that every individual must do the same: cry out to the Lord, be He blessed, and lift his heart to Him, be He blessed, as though he is in the middle of the sea, suspended by a hair, and the storm wind is raging to the heart of heaven, until he does not know what to do. There is almost no time even to cry out–but in truth, he has no counsel and escape but to raise his eyes and heart to the Lord, be He blessed. And this is what a person must always do: engage in hitbodedut and cry out to the Lord, be He blessed, because a person is in great danger in this world, as everyone knows in his soul. And understand these words well. Sichot Haran, 117, pp. 149–150 14 There is a long history of shifting the concept of dying in sanctification of God’s Name from the physical to the spiritual plane–in particular, in visualizing one’s death during the recitation of the Shema. Allusions to this approach may be found in the midrash. It was developed in the Middle Ages and gained especial intensity in the literature of the Zohar and the writings of the Ari, after which it became widely known. Scholars have disagreed as to whether such non-literal “dying in sanctification of God’s Name” nullifies the ethos of actual dying in sanctification of God’s name, or whether, to the contrary, it intensifies the value of literally dying in sanctification of God’s name. Regarding this, see Katz, Halakhah VeKabbalah, pp. 311–330; Hacker, “Klum hu’atak.” In note 4, Hacker refers to other studies on the topic. Michael Fishbane has dealt with this at length. See Fishbane, “Contemplation of death,” and more broadly and with a somewhat different approach, his The Kiss of God, particularly pp. 124–187. And see also Liebes, “Ahavah vitzirah,” pp. 211, 265–269.



Self-sacrifice via the faculty of thought and imagination 

 283

aspects of death. He then developed this in his adulthood and presented it to his Hasidim in the framework of a formal discourse. This discourse, “Da SheHaMachashavah Yeish Lah Tokef Gadol,”15 discusses the power of thought and imagination,16 and focuses on self-sacrifice in sanctification of God’s name: Know that thought has tremendous power. And if a person will strengthen and intensify his thought on anything in the world, he can bring it about. And even if he strengthens his thought greatly on having money, he will certainly have it. And the same applies to anything else. But the thought must be accompanied by nullification of all of the senses, and the thought must be so strong that the person can literally give up his soul with his thought–i.e., [if he concentrates on dying, he can] literally feel the pain of death as a result of resolving that he is ready to give up his soul for the sanctification of God’s Name with any type of death. And a person can strengthen and intensify his thought so much that when he resolves that he is ready to give up his soul to die in sanctification of God’s Name, he will literally feel the pain of death. And that is [the meaning of] what Rabbi Akiva said: “Throughout my entire life I was troubled by this verse, [‘You shall love the Lord your God ... with all your soul’ (Deuteronomy 6:5), meaning, even if he takes your soul, saying to myself,] ‘When will [the opportunity] come to my hands so that I might experience it?’ etc. (Berachot 61b). That is to say, when reciting the Shema, Rabbi Akiva would [visualize] accepting the four death sentences meted out by a [Jewish] court. He accepted self-sacrifice with such intense thought that he suffered and literally felt the pangs of death, literally, as though he were being stoned or burned, literally, without any differentiation [between the thought and the real event]. And that is [the meaning of], “Throughout my entire life I was troubled, ‘When will [the opportunity] come?” etc. In other words, “As a result of my thinking and resolving, ‘When will [the opportunity come to my hands so that I might experience it,’ giving up my soul in sanctification of God’s Name, from that alone I suffered and felt and bore the pangs of death literally (as [mentioned] above). Now that it has come to me in actuality, will I not go through with it? After all, I always bore this suffering literally through mental acceptance alone.” And when a person strengthens his thought of self-sacrifice so much (as [mentioned] above), he can literally die from this suffering as though he died of this [mode of] death in actuality, because there is no difference between the death in actuality and the suffering that he feels from the death in thought, [which causes death] (as [mentioned] above). Therefore, a person must withhold and distance himself so as not to remain in that state when he feels that his soul will soon leave, so as not to die before his time, heaven forbid.17 15 Likutei Moharan I 193. 16 Regarding Rabbi Nachman on service with the power of the imagination, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, in particular Chapter 1, pp. 1–27. Regarding kabbalistic discussion on service with the power of imagination, see Idel, Kabbalah: New Perspectives, pp. 103–111. 17 Likutei Moharan I 193.

284 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

Here Rabbi Nachman states that Rabbi Akiva (son of Joseph!), a figure who was transformed into the emblem of self-sacrifice for the sake of sanctifying God’s Name, engaged in self-sacrifice even before his arrest by the Roman government, “because there is no difference between the death in actuality and the suffering that he feels from the death in thought.” Rabbi Akiva serves as an example of the service of self-sacrifice that every individual can perform with the assistance of his faculty of thought; therefore, Rabbi Nachman must warn his listeners not to remain too long in this precarious psychological state, because it is dangerous and liable to cause a person to “die before his time, heaven forbid.” That is the alternative method that allows a person to experience self-sacrifice through his own initiative without being placed in a situation in which he must literally give up his life. The power of self-sacrifice that occurs in this way is no less than that of literal self-sacrifice, for in its course the person experiences the pangs of death equal to the pangs of death of literal self-sacrifice.18

4 Sacrifice of one’s good name In the discourse, “HaShem Hu HaNefesh” (Likutei Moharan I 260), Rabbi Nachman presents another alternative framework for self-sacrifice: the sacrifice of one’s good name. Rabbi Nachman makes his point by an original translation of the phrase, kiddush Hashem. This phrase, literally “sanctification of the name,” means “sanctification of the Divine name–often through self-sacrifice.” However, Rabbi Nachman here reads it as “sacrifice of one’s good name.” The name is the soul, [which is one’s life,] (as explained in the discourse, “Heikhal HaKodesh” [Likutei Moharan I 59]: “the living soul, that is its name” [Genesis 2:19]–see there). And self-sacrifice pertains to this level–[to a person’s name]. [This is] because there were ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government who sacrificed their souls–[their lives]–in sanctification of [God’s] name, [which is to say,] for the sake of the unification of the Holy One, blessed be He, and His Shekhinah. [This is because] (as is known) [this] essential unification comes about through [a person’s] self-sacrifice. And [the Sages] of those generations saw that rectifying and making [such] heavenly unifications is only possible by means of [giving up] their souls–[their lives]. Therefore, they sacrificed their souls–[their lives]– in sanctification of [God’s] Name….

18 Regarding the Hasidic view of self-sacrifice as something required in prayer and in clinging to God, see Tzava’at HaRivash, 35, p. 6a; Likutim Yekarim, 2, 1a; ibid., 31, 5b. For more on this topic, see Elior, “R. Yosef Caro vehaBesht,” pp. 699–701. Regarding Rabbi Nachman’s view on self-sacrifice during prayer, see Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 50–52, 133–147.



Sacrifice of one’s good name 

 285

Sometimes [actual] death [is needed to fulfill this] requirement, heaven forbid. [That is to say,] a certain number of souls–[lives]–of Israel are killed, heaven forbid, so that a heavenly unification [will result from] their souls rising upward…. Therefore killing occurs, heaven forbid. And the same [dynamic occurs] as a result of the loss of a person’s name–i.e., [his] renown. That is to say, there is someone who is famous yet not famous–i.e., he is famous, [mentioned] in everyone’s mouth and everyone is talking about him, yet nevertheless he is not famous, in the sense that he is not at all significant…. There is a person who does this purposefully and consciously: he sacrifices his soul–[his life]–for the sanctification–[sacrifice]–of [his] name–i.e., his fame, which corresponds to the name (as [mentioned] above), which corresponds to the soul [and life] (as [mentioned] above). And as a result, although he is famous, nevertheless he is not famous at all, because, to the contrary, the opposite is the case, because everyone speaks [negatively] about him and concocts falsehoods about him that he had never even imagined [committing]. And because of that he experiences [the equivalent of his] blood being shed, literally, because of that. And he does that purposefully, because that corresponds to literal sacrifice of his soul, [his life], because the name is the soul (as [mentioned] above), and [so] he also experiences bloodshed because of that (as [mentioned] above). And in this way, he saves Israel from [punishment that] should have come upon them, heaven forbid, for the sake of the [Divine] unification (as mentioned above). And by means of the sacrifice of his name, which is his soul–[his life]–(as [mentioned] above), he saves them (as [mentioned] above).19

Here Rabbi Nachman states that there is an alternative avenue of self-sacrifice, which is the sacrifice of one’s good name. When a person is prepared to sacrifice his good name–his honor and renown–that has something of self-sacrifice of the soul, for the name is the soul. It is his life. A person’s honor and good name are his most valuable possession, and sacrificing them, claims Rabbi Nachman, is no less than sacrificing his soul. There are people ready to sacrifice their soul to protect their honor and good name, and people ready to sacrifice their soul to attain honor and a good name. Therefore, sacrifice of the soul inheres in sacrificing one’s name. And when a person’s name is insulted he feels as though his blood is being spilled. As the Talmudic sages state, “Whoever causes another’s face to blanch in public is like one who sheds blood.”20 In other discourses, Rabbi Nachman develops the theme that the bloodshed of Jewish people, and in particular of a holy Jew, can elevate fallen souls and 19 Likutei Moharan I 260. 20 b. Bava Metzia 58b. In this vein, Rabbi Nachman writes, “Through shame, [a person’s] blood is shed” (Likutei Moharan I 83).

286 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

save them from punishment that they deserve. In these discourses as well, Rabbi Nachman presents shame as a type of bloodshed, since “as a result of the shame, his blood is spilled”21: Regarding bloodshed of [the people of] Israel, there are many supernal and concealed matters, whether the bloodshed is through shame or whether it is literal bloodshed. [This is] because there are a number of fallen souls that can only rise by means of bloodshed of people of Israel–[i.e.,] of a great person. Sometimes [these souls] can rise only through literal bloodshed. And that corresponds to [the Sages’ statement that] “willful sins are transformed into merits”22–[meaning] that through [people’s experience of] shame and bloodshed, the Shekhinah covers their blood with love (as [mentioned] above). And that corresponds to “Love covers all sins” (Proverbs 10:12) (as [mentioned] above). [Then] the willful sins are transformed into merits. And the fallen souls–which correspond to [their] willful sins–are elevated. [This is] because they are elevated and transformed into merits by means of the covering of blood with love.23

Beyond Rabbi Nachman’s general argument regarding self-sacrifice that is brought about by a person’s sacrifice of his name, these discourses bear a prominent autobiographical character–particularly “HaShem Hu HaNefesh.” There is no doubt that Rabbi Nachman is the famous person who sacrifices his soul for the sake of sanctifying God’s name, and who volitionally invites dispute and vilification, in which people confabulate about him and spill his blood. Chayei Moharan describes the inception of Rabbi Nachman’s dispute with the Grandfather of Shpole. At first [the Grandfather of Shpole] had a loving [relationship] with our rebbe, [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing). And the grandfather was very subservient and deferential to [Rabbi Nachman]. But from the time (mentioned above) that our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) entered Zlatipolia, at a distance of two parasangs from [the grandfather’s] border, and also due to the quantity of libel (as [mentioned] above), the great dispute was ignited, until people concocted falsehoods about [Rabbi Nachman] that he had never even imagined [committing]. And our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) said that heaven required him to live there, because there he will rectify the sin of Jeroboam son of Nabat. And the pious, well-known rabbi, the preacher of righteousness of Terhovitza, who was one of the followers of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing), asked his holy mouth, “Why didn’t you first send me to the city of Zlatipolia? I would have spoken with its leaders, and they would have welcomed you into the city with great honor, as is proper.”

21 Likutei Moharan II 83. 22 b. Yoma 86b. 23 Likutei Moharan II 83. For more about the linkage of bloodshed with insults, see Likutei Moharan I 6:2.



Sacrifice of one’s good name 

 287

Our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) answered, “If I would have wanted to wait, I would have entered into the city of Zlatipolia in an enclosed coach, with very great honor. But I could not wait, because I was required by heaven to enter there.”24

In contrast to the accepted custom, according to which a tzaddik who wishes to settle in a locality that is in the bailiwick of another tzaddik must request permission from him and from the city elders, Rabbi Nachman encroached upon the bailiwick of the Grandfather of Shpole and settled in Zlatipolia without seeking permission either from him or from the wealthy people who served as the civil leaders.25 Rabbi Nachman chose not to do so, even though following the protocol would have made it possible for him to enter the city with great honor and without dispute. Rabbi Nachman was aware of the dispute that he was arousing. He explained his conduct by saying that “heaven required him to live there,” in order to carry out a rectification. The dispute indeed worsened “until people concocted falsehoods about [Rabbi Nachman] that he had never even imagined [committing].” This phraseology parallels the description in “HaShem Hu HaNefesh,” quoted earlier, according to which “everyone speaks [negatively] about him–[the tzaddik who sacrifices his name]–and concocts falsehoods about him that he had never even imagined [committing].” This description of the dispute about Rabbi Nachman is not solely Rabbi Natan’s phraseology, but relies upon the words of Rabbi Nachman himself, who spoke on this topic when he was in Uman: In Uman, [Rabbi Nachman] spoke on the topic of the dispute against him, in which people speak falsehoods about him. He complained, [quoting the verse], “And I would redeem them”–i.e., the verse in Hosea 7, where the prophet complains that he wants to perform beneficial actions for Israel, yet they speak falsehoods against him. As the verse states, “And I would redeem them, yet they have spoken falsehoods against me.”26

A similar passage may be found in Sichot Haran: Once [Rabbi Nachman] said: “[My disputants] are not disagreeing with me at all.” Rather, they were disagreeing with a person who has done what the disputants imagine [that Rabbi Nachman has done]. And it is certainly proper to challenge such a person. That is to say, the disputants concoct falsehoods and lies about [Rabbi Nachman] that had he had

24 Chayei Moharan (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 114 [11]), p. 151. 25 See regarding this Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 9–15; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 101–102. 26 Chayei Moharan (“Inyan HaMachloket She’Alav,” 396 [5]), pp. 340–341; emphasis mine (Zvi Mark).

288 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

never even imagined [committing]–that he had done such-and-such, all of which is a lie and falsehood.27

Thus, Rabbi Nachman’s description in Likutei Moharan I 260 of the tzaddik who sacrifices his name and is besmirched by falsehoods that had he had never even imagined committing, yet who nevertheless works to redeem Israel and “in this way, he saves Israel from [punishment that] should have come upon them, heaven forbid,”28 fits precisely–even linguistically–his descriptions of what happened to him: “and I would redeem them, yet they spoke falsehoods against me.” Paradoxically, the falsehoods uttered about the tzaddik are his way of sacrificing himself to redeem Israel: “by means of the sacrifice of his name, which is his soul–[his life]–(as [mentioned] above), he saves them (as [mentioned] above).”29 The connection between the dispute and persecutions fostered by the Grandfather of Shpole and Rabbi Nachman’s bloodshed is expressed in a particularly stinging passage elided from Chayei Moharan. This passage begins with a quote copied from Rabbi Nachman’s own handwriting: “Know, my brothers and friends–I will reveal a secret to you, and hide this secret so that it will be concealed among you, in order not to increase dispute in Israel–know that the Grandfather of the city of Shpole, the well-known Yuda Leib ben Borukh, know that I am in [the realm of] holiness and he is opposite me, in [the realm of] impurity.”30 The transcriber then quotes a statement that Rabbi Nachman made a few days before he passed away: [Rabbi Nachman] said: “I have an enemy whose anger and wrath against me calm down only when he sees my blood. Ikh hob a soynei vos her kilt zikh andersh nit in mir, seiden er zeit mein blut.” And he did not reveal who this enemy is. And he said this on [his] last Rosh Hashanah, after he delivered the discourse, “Tik’u Tokhachah,” when he bled profusely.31

The enemy, the besmirchings and the persecutions caused Rabbi Nachman’s blood to be spilled. And here Rabbi Nachman’s description grew literally true, for he felt that his tuberculosis, with the resultant flow of blood that streamed from his throat, was a direct result of the hostility directed toward him, and that 27 Sichot Haran, 182, pp. 226–227. 28 Likutei Moharan I 260. 29 Ibid. 30 Manuscript of Rabbi Alter Tepliker, Sefer Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan, p. 9a. Published in Chayei Moharan (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 123 [20]), p. 161. 31 Manuscript of Tepliker, ibid., p. 10b. Published in Chayei Moharan (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 123 [20]), p. 123.



The elevation of fallen souls in Uman 

 289

it led to his death. As noted above, Rabbi Nachman claimed that he could have prevented this dispute with the Grandfather and entered Zlatipolia in an enclosed carriage, with great honor, but he felt compelled from heaven to enter the city precipitately. The dispute that broke out in consequence of this decision accompanied Rabbi Nachman for the rest of his life, and in his opinion it led to the spilling of his blood and to his death. Rabbi Nachman, who was well aware of his impending death, saw in that death the bloodshed of a great man who sacrifices his name and soul in sanctification of God’s name, and is thus able to elevate and rectify souls that could not be rectified in any other way.

5 The elevation of fallen souls in Uman As noted above, Rabbi Nachman’s claim that “there are a number of fallen souls that can only rise by means of bloodshed of people of Israel–[i.e.,] of a great person…. Through [people’s experience of] shame and bloodshed, the Shekhinah covers their blood with love…. [Then] the willful sins are transformed into merits. And the fallen souls … are elevated,”32 is linked to his understanding of his death as occurring in sanctification of God’s Name, caused by the bloodshed of hatred and shame, which was actualized in his literal bloodshed, his blood flowing freely from his throat, and in his death, which raised fallen souls. As will be seen, Rabbi Nachman associated the topic of elevation of souls not only with the event of his death but also with the locale in which it would occur: the city of Uman. This is indicated by Rabbi Nachman’s comparison of his coming to Uman with an episode that occurred when his great-grandfather, the Baal Shem Tov, came “to some place.” Rabbi Nachman initially expressed this comparison allusively, and only after some time passed did he state it explicitly. The first time that Rabbi Nachman described what happened to the Baal Shem Tov was as he was traveling to Uman: In the course of [Rabbi Nachman’s] journey, before he entered Uman, near the city, he told a story of the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing). [He told] that one time the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) came to some place. And he was in [a state of] very great bitterness and depression. And [his students] noticed that he was bitter, but who would open his mouth to ask him about that? And he was like that for a day and a half. Afterwards, on the Sabbath eve, in the afternoon, the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) commanded that [his students] request [that the townspeople] bring all of the

32 Likutei Moharan II 83.

290 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

guests in the city to eat with him on the Sabbath. And there were not many guests. They found only two guests, traveling by foot. And they brought them to him. Afterwards, [the students] heard the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) arguing with them. And our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) said that he does not clearly remember what happened in the story. But the point was that there were souls that had been in that locale for 300 years, who had not had an elevation. And when the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) came there, they all gathered around him, because they were always hoping for such a person who can rectify them. As a result, he experienced depression, because the matter weighed very heavily upon him. It was only possible to rectify them with his death, and that was very hard for him. Therefore, he was depressed. And the Lord, may He be blessed, sent him these two wayfarers (as mentioned above), who were very great tzaddikim. And they accepted half [of the burden], and [the other] half remained with the Baal Shem Tov.33 And in this way, the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) was saved. And it appears that these two [travelers] (mentioned above) suffered damage as a result of this.34

Rabbi Nachman does not say that this story is relevant to his own present journey. He too, like the Baal Shem Tov, was traveling to a new place at the time that he told this story. However, there was as yet insufficient information to posit a link between the Baal Shem Tov’s experience and Rabbi Nachman’s journey. But one day before he died, Rabbi Nachman returned to this story, and this time he more completely explained its relevance to his journey to Uman and to his death: On Tuesday, 18 Tishrei, the second day of the intermediate days of Succot, in the evening, 5571, “the ark of God was taken and lifted up….” And [Rabbi Nachman] was buried on the next day, on Wednesday, in Uman, in the site that he had chosen when he had been alive, as is explained in this book, which tells about what he said, describing explicitly that he wished to repose in Uman because it had been the site of a major sanctification of [God’s] Name (as is well-known). Also, the central point of his passing away had to do with the martyrs who had been killed there, as we understood from his words that he spoke in Uman, [telling] that tens of thousands of souls are there that he must elevate. 33 The italicized passage appears solely in Rabbi Naftali’s manuscript of Chayei Moharan (unpaginated). It does not appear in other manuscripts of Chayei Moharan and of HaHashmatot MeiChayei Moharan. Therefore, it was not published in the editions of Chayei Moharan to which elided passages were restored (Chayei Moharan Im HaHashmatot [5760]; Chayei Moharan Im Hashmatot [5765]). Regarding the great importance of Rabbi Naftali’s manuscript of Chayei Moharan, see Mark, All of the Stories of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav (“Introduction”) (in preparation). The importance of this passage regarding the topic under discussion here will grow clear further on. 34 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiato VIshivato B’Umin,” 190 [6]), p. 215.



The elevation of fallen souls in Uman 

 291

Also: On Monday, the first of the intermediate days (as mentioned above), one day before he passed away, he said to me, “Do you recall the story that I told you?” I said to him, “Which story?” He answered me, “The story of the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) that I told you when I came to Uman.” I answered him, “Yes.” He said, “They have looked toward me for a long time to bring me here.” Then he said, “Here there aren’t a thousand souls, but tens of thousands upon tens of thousands upon tens of thousands.” That night too he spoke of this matter as well…. And he said, “Why should you worry, since I am proceeding before you…. And if these souls, who did not know me at all, are hoping for my rectifications, how much more [will I help] you.”35

This clearly explains why Rabbi Nachman saw fit to tell the story about the Baal Shem Tov as he was coming into Uman. Rabbi Nachman too was coming to a place where multitudes of souls that had not yet been elevated needed his rectifications; and he too, like the Baal Shem Tov, knew that the matter was liable to cost him his life, because–as he explained in the discourse, “Al Yedei Tikun HaBrit,”36 there are fallen souls that can only be elevated when a great man sacrifices his soul on their behalf. The Baal Shem Tov succeeded in escaping death, but when Rabbi Nachman came to Uman, tens of thousands upon tens of thousands of souls grasped at him, seeking rectification, and he sacrificed his soul to help them. Rabbi Nachman added that he was now also rectifying the souls of his living Hasidim, who had no reason to worry, for he was proceeding before them to assure their betterment. Thus, Rabbi Nachman’s connection to Uman was apparently related to his desire to rectify souls (both during his lifetime and afterwards): in particular, the souls of martyrs killed by government forces. This connection to Uman was related to Rabbi Nachman’s self-image as a person ready and willing to die in sanctification of God’s name–an ideal that had pulsed within him since his youth. Rabbi Nachman felt that he was already engaged in self-sacrifice, in his service of God with his imaginative faculty and in the sacrifice of his good name. And then his readiness to sacrifice himself was realized in an additional manner: with his actual death.

35 Ibid., 191, p. 116. 36 Likutei Moharan II 83.

292 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

The beginning of this chapter has emphasized the link between Rabbi Nachman’s desire to be buried in Uman and the ritualistic rectifications that he established (including the revelation of the ten chapters of psalms that serve as part of a rectification for a nocturnal emission and, when performed at his gravesite, as a universal rectification): “and the journey to Uman was a beginning and preparation for all of these rectifications forever.”37 Further on, I will attempt to elucidate the connection linking Uman as a site of the sanctification of God’s name with the rectifications that Rabbi Nachman established, and the connection between these two elements with the rectification of souls.

6 Sanctification of God’s name, ten chapters of psalms, the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the rectification performed on pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave As demonstrated earlier, Tikun 69 of the Tikunei Zohar contains a pronounced collection of components that exist as well in Rabbi Nachman’s rectification for a nocturnal emission and in “The Story of the Sixth Beggar.” In addition, Tikun 69 contains another teaching that discusses the profound ramifications of the blemish that came into being as a result of the ten drops of seed that emerged from Joseph when Potiphar’s wife enticed him: And with that [letter] yod, Joseph sinned. As the verse states, “But his bow was firm, and the arms of his hands were bedecked with gold” (Genesis 49:24). What is [the meaning of] “vayafuzu–bedecked with gold”? [The middle of this word may be read as yod–faz.] That [means that] a drop, which is the yod, shot out [faz] among his ten fingers, and split into ten sparks that were shot from the bow, which is the covenant. And where were they shot? Into the ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government…. And [Joseph] received his punishment in those ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government.38 39

According to the zoharic conception, the death of the ten sages killed by the Roman government was a consequence–a punishment and rectification–for Joseph’s ten drops of seed spilled in vain. Joseph received his punishment through the death of the ten sages killed by the Roman government, who had been created from those ten drops, for whatever happened to them happened to Joseph. This zoharic 37 Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 46, p. 71. 38 Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 69), p. 110a. 39 Translation based on Tikunei Zohar Im Targum, p. 580.



Sanctification of God’s name 

 293

outlook always appears in the kabbalah of the Ari and later kabbalistic literature, expanding and developing the mythic meaning of the blemish and the manner in which it is rectified for all generations.40 Rabbi Nachman saw in the ten sages killed by the Roman government an archetype of all those killed in sanctification of God’s name throughout the generations,41 and he thus saw a link between Joseph and every Jew who sacrifices himself in sanctification of God’s name. Interestingly, Rabbi Nachman does not emphasize the punishment of Joseph–who suffers whenever a Jew is killed in sanctification of God’s name–but the idea that every Jew who sacrifices himself in sanctification of God’s name does so by making use of the power and level of Joseph that exists within him. Thus, Rabbi Nachman writes in his discourse, “Hashem Oz L’Amo Yitein, Hashem YiVarekh Et Amo VaShalom”: It is known that peace is great…. And what is peace? [It occurs] when two opposites are bound together.42 As the phrase states, “He Who makes peace in His heights” (prayerbook). [God’s “heights”–heaven–is composed of two opposites: fire and water.] [This is] because one angel [comprising part of heaven] is of fire and [the other] is of water. These are two opposites, since water extinguishes fire. But the Holy One, blessed be He, makes peace between them and binds them together. And that corresponds to Joseph, because Joseph binds together two opposites: chasadim and gevurot…. And that corresponds to the sanctification of [God’s] name. [This is] because the sanctification of [God’s] name also corresponds to chasadim and gevurot. [That is] because at first a person is fervent with flames of love. That corresponds to chasadim. And afterwards he

40 The secret of [the verse,] “And the arms of his hands were bedecked with gold,” is the secret of the ten drops that were shot from between the nails…. And that is the secret of the drops of Joseph’s seed that emerged without a female [recipient] but from a male alone. And they are the ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government. Eitz Chaim, Part 1, p. 110 All of those ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government are the ten drops of seed that emerged from Joseph. Sha’ar HaGilgulim (“Hakdamah,” 34), p. 105 Note 1 there lists additional sources. Regarding the link between the drops of Joseph and the ten sages killed by the Roman government, see Wolfson, Language, Eros, Being, pp. 310–311. 41 There were ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government who sacrificed themselves in sanctification of [God’s name…. And sometimes death comes [to fulfill] this [Divine] purpose, heaven forbid, that a large number of souls of Israel are killed, heaven forbid. Likutei Moharan I 260 42 Zohar, Part 3 (“Parshat Vayikra”), p. 12b.

294 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

overcomes his evil inclination, and sacrifices himself in order to die in sanctification of [God’s] name. That corresponds to gevurot. [Both of these together] are the level of peace, the level of Joseph (as [mentioned] above). And therefore even sinners of Israel are willing to die in sanctification of [God’s] name…. Thus, every individual of Israel has a connection within himself to the level of Joseph, which is the level of peace, the level of the sanctification of [God’s] name (as [mentioned] above). And so as soon as [non-Jews] want to remove [a Jew] from [his] religion, heaven forbid, to separate him from the level of Israel, that immediately arouses in him the level of Joseph connected to Israel, which is the level of self-sacrifice in sanctification of [God’s] name– i.e., flames of love–and he [then] overcomes his [evil] inclination to die in sanctification of [God’s] Name. This corresponds to peace, the level of Joseph…. That corresponds to Joseph, the level of self-sacrifice in sanctification of [God’s] name.43

Thus, it appears that the rectification of the blemish caused by Joseph’s ten drops comes about through those killed in sanctification of God’s name–not only through their hardship and sufferings, which bestow atonement and rectification of the blemish, but also through their readiness to sacrifice their lives. Rabbi Nachman explains that self-sacrifice is the trait of Joseph because he possesses a combination of opposites, chesed and gevurah, which are the equivalent of fire and water, and a person requires a blend of these two when he is called upon to sacrifice himself in sanctification of God’s name. In this discourse, “Hashem Oz,” Rabbi Nachman does not mention Joseph’s blemish brought about by the drops of semen, nor does he mention the rectification for this blemish brought about through sanctification of God’s name–in particular, that of the ten sages killed by the Roman government. However, when combined with discourse Likutei Moharan I 205–which discusses the rectification for a nocturnal emission and explains the ten chapters of psalms and what a person must have in mind when reciting them–the connection is self-explanatory: And as a person recites the psalms, he must have in mind that the numerical value of [the word] tehillim (‘psalms’) is 485, which is precisely the numerical value of the two [Divine] names, El Elohim, when [they are spelled out in] full, like this: Alef Lamed; Alef Lamed Hei Yud Mem. [This indicates] that by means of these two [Divine] names the drop [is able to] emerge from the husk.

43 Likutei Moharan I 80.



Sanctification of God’s name 

 295

[This is] because the drop corresponds to the [two sefirot of] chesed [‘kindness’] and gevurah [‘might’] (as is well-known44). [That is] because [the drop] possesses the properties of fire and water, warmth and moisture, which correspond to chesed and gevurah. And by means of the two names El Elohim (as [mentioned] above), which correspond to chesed and gevurah (as is well-known45), which have the numerical value of [the word] tehillim (as [mentioned] above), the drop is brought forth from there. And [so] a person must have this in mind when he recites the psalms…. Also, the drop [of semen] comes from the ‘mind’ [da’at], which corresponds to chesed and gevurah (as is known). [This is] because the drop [of semen] corresponds to chesed and gevurah (as [mentioned] above). And it is known that the mind [da’at] corresponds to five chasadim [plural of chesed] and five gevurot [plural of gevurah]–which together are ten.46 Therefore a person needs to recite ten chapters.

With his explanation of what a person must bear in mind when he recites the rectification, Rabbi Nachman provides a way to understand its mechanism. When a person recites the psalms, he must have in mind that the word tehillim possesses a combination of two Divine names, El and Elohim, which correspond to chesed and gevurah, with the aid of which the drop–which itself contains a combination of chesed and gevurah, water and fire, moistness and heat–emerges from the husk. Also, the reason that there are ten chapters may be explained in light of the zoharic viewpoint that the drop contains five chasadim and five gevurot, which together are ten. This is linked to Joseph, for (as noted earlier) the discourse “Hashem Oz” states that this combination corresponds to the peace that characterizes Joseph, who combines chesed and gevurah. This transforms Joseph into the level of sanctification of God’s name, which requires the combination of chesed and gevurah. Therefore, every act of self-sacrifice is on the level of Joseph. The level of Joseph–the combination of chesed and gevurah, water and fire, moisture and heat–is itself self-sacrifice and the rectification for seed spilled in vain. Rabbi Nachman’s words are therefore in alignment with and serve as an introduction to the zoharic and Lurianic view that the ten sages killed by the 44 Eitz Chaim describes the journey through which the drop travels in the process of unification as a process that unifies chesed and gevurah: And then yesod of Abba is clothed in yesod of Ima, where chesed and gevurah are mixed together (as is known). That is why yesod is called ‘west’ (ma’arav), for it is a ‘mixture’ (eiruv) of chesed and gevurah together. Eitz Chaim, p. 150 45 See for example Sha’arei Orah, Part 1, Gate 5 (“HaSefirah HaShishit”), p. 179. 46 See, for instance, Sha’ar HaKavanot (“Inyan Pesach: Derush 1”), p. 139.

296 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

Roman government, who sacrificed themselves in sanctification of God’s name, are themselves the ten drops of Joseph’s seed, and their death constitutes the punishment of and rectification for the blemish that was caused by the emergence of these ten drops.

7 The yearning to die in sanctification of God’s name as part of Rabbi Nachman’s mission in his identification with Messiah son of Joseph47 In light of the above, Rabbi Nachman’s yearning to die in sanctification of God’s name has an additional aspect: his view of himself as a tzaddik on the level of Joseph, and in particular as a tzaddik on the level of Messiah son of Joseph.48 In previous chapters, I expanded on the topic of Rabbi Nachman’s self-concept as Joseph the tzaddik, who overcame a test and as a result attained the revelation of the Torah. I also claimed that Rabbi Nachman believed that in the merit of his overcoming tests he was worthy of establishing and revealing new rectifications– in particular, rectifications of the covenant. This chapter has shown that Rabbi Nachman’s self-awareness as being on the level of Joseph automatically invokes his awareness of responsibility for [rectifying] the terrible blemish brought about by the ten drops of seed that Joseph spilled in vain. As stated earlier, Rabbi Nachman testified that he had succeeded in completely rectifying his sexual desire while he was still tender in years, and that he had attained a level higher than had the Baal Shem Tov, for the Baal Shem Tov experienced a single nocturnal emission in his lifetime, whereas Rabbi Nachman experienced none. However, it now grows clear that even this high level does not suffice to rectify the covenant, for the Zohar and the kabbalah of the Ari teach that the blemish of the ten drops of Joseph’s seed still exists, and that full atonement for this blemish is possible solely by means of self-sacrifice in sanctification of God’s Name. Rabbi Nachman, who saw himself as a person capable and worthy of rectifying the covenant in a way that no past tzaddik had ever done and as someone who established

47 Regarding the link between yearning to die in sanctification of God’s name and messianic hopes following the auto-da-fe of Shlomo Molcho, and in its Hasidic version, see Elior, “R. Yosef Caro vehaBesht,” pp. 672–675. 48 Arthur Green has proposed a connection between Rabbi Nachman’s desire to be buried near those killed in the sanctification of God’s name and his self-awareness as Messiah son of Joseph, who is destined to be killed in sanctification of God’s name as part of his mission to prepare the way for Messiah son of David. See Green, Tormented Master, p. 254.



The yearning to die in sanctification of God’s name 

 297

a new rectification that had no precedent, apparently saw himself as responsible to effect the cosmic rectification of the covenant, which had been blemished by Joseph’s ten drops.49 Rabbi Nachman saw that he must complete his mission of rectification with his own self-sacrifice in sanctification of God’s name, something begun by the ten sages killed by the Roman government, for only in this way would it be possible to gain atonement for and rectify the blemish of Joseph’s emission of the ten drops. And Rabbi Nachman saw himself as someone who had sacrificed himself for the sake of the sanctification of God’s name even while alive, and that he would do so as well at the time of his death. Thus, besides Rabbi Nachman’s mission of rectifying and elevating the tens of thousands of souls who required his dying in sanctification of God’s name in order to rectify and elevate them, he had another goal for whose sake he wished to die in sanctification of God’s name: the rectification of Joseph’s ten drops of seed; and that rectification, like [that of rectifying the martyrs], could be attained only by means of dying in sanctification of God’s name. In truth, these are not two separate purposes but one. Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications–the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification performed at his gravesite–are part of his rectification and elevation of souls. They constitute the self-same rectification and enterprise, because the rectification of blemishes of the covenant, [which resulted from] drops of seed that came forth in vain, is itself the enterprise of elevating souls. Rabbi Nachman explained in Likutei Moharan I 95 that the purpose of the rectification for a nocturnal emission is to raise the drop from the husk–i.e., to elevate the soul incipient in the drop, which could have served as a kernel of life but which, since it emerged in vain, was grasped by the husk, Lilith–and to return it to the world of the Shekhinah and holiness.50 The rectification for a nocturnal emission is therefore the rectification of souls that had had no way of being elevated and their restoration to life in the world of holiness. Furthermore, since the souls of the ten sages killed by the Roman government were formed from the ten drops of Joseph’s seed, the rectification of the souls of those killed by government forces is a rectification of sparks and souls brought into being by the blemish caused by a seminal emission. That rectification is performed when a person recites ten chapters of psalms, which are ten 49 Everything that happened to Joseph the tzaddik in this world with his mistress, Potiphar’s wife, with the emergence of his ten drops of seed from between his toenails–as the verse states, “And the arms of his hands were bedecked with gold”– occurred above in heaven with the supernal Joseph the tzaddik, who is the sefirah of yesod. Sha’ar HaGilgulim (“Hakdamah,” 26), p. 69 50 I discussed this topic above in Chapter 4.

298 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

types of melody and song, ten types of pulse that revive the princess who was wounded by the ten arrows representing blemishes of the covenant, which correspond to the ten drops of Joseph that were reincarnated into the souls of the ten sages killed by the Roman government. It is possible that the rectification of souls that Rabbi Nachman engaged in is broader than the parameters stated above, and involves other souls and blemishes. But Rabbi Nachman emphasized–and Rabbi Natan after him–that essentially Rabbi Nachman came to Uman to complete the elevation and rectification of those buried there who had been killed in sanctification of God’s name. The elevation and rectification of these souls is accomplished by means of the rectifications for a nocturnal emission and the rectification of the ten chapters of psalms. But Rabbi Nachman could only complete the rectification with his death. His death rectified and elevated blemished souls and created the possibility of applying the last universal rectification that he established: the rectification performed by pilgrimage to his gravesite in Uman. According to this, Rabbi Nachman’s death is not only a sign that he completed his work and can therefore rest in peace, but since his death is characterized by self-sacrifice in sanctification of God’s name, it serves as an important component in the rectifications that he established and in his ability to rectify souls that were brought into being from the drops of seminal emission, souls that were reincarnated into those killed in the sanctification of God’s name, and to assure full personal rectification for all who will perform the rectification in the future. In this way, Rabbi Nachman heals every soul that requires rectification, and in parallel he heals the Shekhinah, which fell faint after it was wounded by the ten arrows representing the blemish of the covenant, and he restores her strength and the ten types of pulse that give her life. He does so with the help of the ten types of melody and joy that exist within the ten chapters of psalms that a person must recite in Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications.

“The Small Book”: the Baal Shem Tov’s rectifications for the Sabbath eve As noted above, at the time of Rabbi Nachman’s journey to Uman, shortly before his death, Rabbi Nachman associated the rectifications of souls that he now sought to perform with the rectifications that the Baal Shem Tov was called upon to perform one Sabbath eve when he came to a place where 300 souls required rectification and elevation. In this context, it is instructive to note that a bond linking the rectification and elevation of souls with the rectification for the blemish of a nocturnal emission is attributed to the Baal Shem Tov, in a rectification that he would perform on the Sabbath eve.



The yearning to die in sanctification of God’s name 

 299

“The Small Book”51–also called “The [Baal Shem Tov’s] Commentary on Hodu”–is a Hasidic commentary attributed to the Baal Shem Tov52 that describes mystical ‘intentions’ (kavanot) that a person should have in mind as he recites Psalm 107 on the Sabbath eve. According to this commentary, a person should view the psalm as a song of holy sparks–of souls–that fell into the husks and on the Sabbath are elevated to the world of holiness, and which accordingly thank and praise God. The underlying idea is not new, for descriptions of souls rising on the eve of the Sabbath appear in the kabbalah of the Ari. The innovative aspect of the present description is the claim that these souls are “holy sparks that are called ‘the dispersed of Israel’ (Psalms 147:2), who constitute the secret of the drop of seed [spilled] in vain.” That is to say, these are souls that were brought into being as a result of seed having been spilled in vain,53 who require the aid of the tzaddik to pull them out of the husks and elevate them to a renewed existence as “sons of the living God.”54 It is difficult to determine whether “The Small Book” was indeed written by the Baal Shem Tov or by another Hasidic figure, but there is no doubt that from a certain stage it was attributed to the Baal Shem Tov. Beginning with the first edition, which appeared in 5565 and which Rabbi Nachman would have had access to, “The Small Book” was presented as “The Baal Shem Tov’s Commentary on Psalm 107.” Therefore, a connection linking the story about the Baal Shem Tov who elevates souls on the eve of Sabbath with a commentary on Psalm 107, which deals with raising souls on the eve of the Sabbath, is natural, and it possibly informs Rabbi Nachman’s comparison between his rectification of souls in Uman (from his arrival through his death) and the Baal Shem Tov’s rectification of souls. 51 Yaakov Travis notes the connection between “The Small Book” and the elevation of souls performed by the Baal Shem Tov and by Rabbi Nachman. He notes as well that “The Small Book” was published in 5565, in Rabbi Nachman’s lifetime and before he developed this theme in his discourses. Travis does not associate the rectification of souls with the rectification for spilling seed in vain. See Travis, “Adorning the souls of the dead,” p. 167. 52 In its first printing, in Zhitomir, 5565, the commentary was attributed to the Baal Shem Tov. The commentary is quoted in various Hasidic sources. However, in Rabbi Yaakov Yosef’s writings and in early Hasidic manuscripts these quotations are not attributed to the Baal Shem Tov. Therefore, Gershom Scholem rejected the attribution of the commentary to the Baal Shem Tov. See Scholem, “Musag hatzaddik,” pp. 224–225, note 108. On the other hand, Rivka Schatz-Oppenheimer discovered a manuscript of this commentary that does attribute it explicitly to the Baal Shem Tov. As a result of this and other evidence, she claimed that this is indeed a commentary of the Baal Shem Tov, although the question of the lack of attribution to the Baal Shem Tov in his students’ writings remains. See Schatz-Oppenheimer, Hasidism as Mysticism, pp. 342–381. See also Tzuker, “Ketav yad”; Altshuler, The Messianic Secret, pp. 321–322. 53 See Schatz-Oppenheimer, Hasidism as Mysticism, pp. 361–362. 54 See ibid., pp. 363–364.

300 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

8 The dream about Yom Kippur and Rabbi Nachman’s self-sacrifice As discussed above, Rabbi Nachman saw himself as engaging in self-sacrifice for the sanctification of God’s name even in the course of his lifetime. Rabbi Nachman felt that his enemies’ persecutions and vilifications were spilling his blood, whereas he was prepared to give his life to rescue and redeem all those who required his assistance. And he saw his death as an act of martyrdom with the aim of raising all of the souls that required elevation and rectification, an achievement that could be attained only by means of self-sacrifice in sanctification of God’s name. Rabbi Nachman had been preparing himself for this self-sacrifice throughout his entire life: from his many prayers and yearnings in his youth that he may die in sanctification of God’s name, through visualizing his death and funeral so that he experienced the pangs of martyrdom, and–after he became a well-known tzaddik–sacrificing his name and soul by exposing himself purposely to dispute and calumny that are the equivalent of bloodshed, and to engage in battle with the Grandfather of Shpole, who stated that his mind would not be set at ease until he saw Rabbi Nachman’s blood shed unto death. The view that Rabbi Nachman’s death constituted martyrdom, with all that that implies, is clearly indicated by Rabbi Natan: The Ten Days of Repentance correspond to the ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government. Through their power alone is it possible to draw down atonement. And so we mention them on Yom Kippur, because, ever since the time of the Destruction [of the Temple], this kindness is drawn down only by means of those killed “in sanctification of Your Name,” etc., whose paradigmatic archetype is the [group of] ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government, which corresponds to the power of [departed] tzaddikim who “dwell in the dust” (Isaiah 26:19– as [mentioned] above). [This is] because the great, true tzaddikim died in sanctification of [God’s] name even when they died on their beds. [That is] because all the days of their lives they sacrificed themselves in sanctification of [God’s] Name on a number of various levels–particularly, at their end, when they literally passed away.55

55 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 8 (“Choshen Mishpat: Hilkhot Matnat Shekhiv Meyra,” 5), p. 18. Similar sentiments are expressed in the midrash: “‘For Your sake, we have been killed all the day; we are thought of as sheep to the slaughter’ (Psalms 44:23). Rabbi Shimon ben Menasia says: How is it possible for a person to be killed every day? [The meaning is] that the Holy One, blessed be He, considers the tzaddikim as though they are killed every day” (Sifrei [“Devorim: V’Etchanan,” 6:32], p. 55; and see also Yalkut HaNekhiri LeTehillim, 2, p. 116b). And see sources brought above in note 14.



The dream about Yom Kippur and Rabbi Nachman’s self-sacrifice 

 301

Terms such as “the true tzaddik” and “the great tzaddik” serve in Bratslav as a designation of Rabbi Nachman. “When [Bratslav authors] do not mention [Rabbi Nachman] there or in other places when quoting his holy words, but speak generally about a tzaddik, that is because the way of peace and honoring God is to hide a matter.”56 It is a reasonable assumption that even when Rabbi Nachman speaks in the plural–e.g., “the great, true tzaddikim”–the focus is on him, even if he is no more than a link in a chain of great, true tzaddikim throughout the generations. The quote below by Rabbi Natan more clearly expresses the ideas that the tzaddik’s death is martyrdom, that the tzaddik is Rabbi Nachman, and that he was involved with the ten sages killed by the Roman government. And this quote also more clearly expresses the connection linking these with Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications and his decision to be buried in the cemetery in Uman. However, the great tzaddik dies in sanctification of [God’s] name. [This is] because throughout all the days of his life he sacrificed himself every day in sanctification of [God’s] name. And in particular, at the time of his literal death he certainly dies in sanctification of [God’s] Name. And the essence of death in sanctification of [God’s] name corresponds to prayer on the level of the judgment of the man of might, which is the level of the ten [sages] who were killed by the [Roman] government. [That is] because all extraction of the sparks from the husks until now and until the [messianic] end is brought about through the agency [of that prayer]…. That corresponds to [the verse], “As I leave the city, I will spread out my hands” (Exodus 9:29). When he leaves the city to his gravesite, he will spread his hands out in prayer (as mentioned above), until he completes what he desires. And so there at his gravesite everyone can be rectified–even the lowest of the low–because that is the site of the essence of the power of the level of prayer (as mentioned above), by means of which exists the essence of the voice of rebuke (mentioned above), which is the voice of melody (mentioned above), by means of which he rebukes Israel…. And so [at his gravesite] everything will be rectified properly on behalf of every person who merits to come there in his lifetime. And that corresponds to the ten chapters of psalms that people recite there, which correspond to the ten types of melody (…), which correspond to the voice of melody (as [mentioned] above) that will be awakened in the [messianic] future. That [voice] corresponds to the voice of his holy rebuke (as [mentioned] above), by means of which he arouses the good fragrance of even the very lowest Jew and rectifies everything.57

56 Kokhavei Ohr (“Chokhmah UVinah,” 21), p.  111. For more on this, see Weiss, Mechkarim, pp. 151–152; Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, p. 54. 57 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 3 (“Orach Chaim: Hilkhot Chol Hamoed,” 4:15), pp. 191–192.

302 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

Here too Rabbi Nachman is not explicitly mentioned, but there is no doubt that Rabbi Natan’s reference to “the great tzaddik” who “at the time of his literal death certainly dies in sanctification of [God’s] name” is Rabbi Nachman. The use of the verse, “When I leave the city I will spread my hands,” to describe the tzaddik’s leaving the city to be buried in the cemetery, where he will act after his death as a master of prayer to nullify harsh heavenly decrees, was first stated by Rabbi Nachman himself: “I heard from Rabbi Naftali that Rabbi Nachman said in Uman: ‘As I leave the city, I will spread out my hands.’”58 It may also be understood that the phrase, “the ten chapters of psalms that people recite there,” indicates that the passage is speaking of the gravesite of Rabbi Nachman, who instructed supplicants to come to his grave and there recite the ten chapters of psalms that he established and perform the other elements of the rectification. And then, even if that person is the lowest of the low, Rabbi Nachman promised to rectify him. Rabbi Nachman is also the one who rebukes– not with the help of fasts but with the help of the ten types of melody–who established the pilgrimage to his gravesite as a universal rectification that rectifies everything. This passage relates that Rabbi Nachman achieved his goal: in the course of his life, he “died” in sanctification of God’s Name “on a number of levels,” until he underwent literal death. With that, Rabbi Nachman joined the martyrs of Uman who sacrificed their lives in sanctification of God’s name, as a tzaddik who sacrificed himself in sanctification of God’s Name, and who has the power to complete and actualize all of the rectifications performed by the ten sages killed by the Roman government. He did so with the assistance of the ten types of melody and joy that rectify the blemish of the covenant caused by the ten drops of Joseph’s seed and that heal all ten types of arrows and flaws that are brought about by all types of blemishes of the covenant. These rectifications, which are based on joy, make it possible for even the very lowest Jew to attain rectification when he makes pilgrimage to the gravesite of the true tzaddik who sacrificed himself in sanctification of God’s name, the tzaddik interred in the cemetery in Uman together with those killed by the government. He is “the great tzaddik” who prophesied, “Un ikh heil zi–‘and I heal her,’” the true tzaddik “who rectifies everything.”

58 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiato VIshivato B’Umin,” 226 [42]), p. 249.



The dream about Yom Kippur and Rabbi Nachman’s self-sacrifice 

 303

The dream about Yom Kippur This view that Rabbi Nachman’s death had the character of self-sacrifice and constituted the sanctification of God’s name does not seem to correspond with the implications of a nightmare that Rabbi Nachman experienced a year earlier. The crux of this dream, which is called “the dream about Yom Kippur,”59 casts doubt on Rabbi Nachman’s actual readiness to sacrifice himself so that his death might serve as a rectification and atonement. The dream was recorded in the manuscript of Chayei Moharan, but when Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin had the book published, this passage was removed. It was, however, preserved in various manuscripts, and was published for the first time in 5693 by Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz.60 The version of the dream quoted below follows Rabbi Alter Tepliker’s manuscript, with variations from other sources cited in the footnotes.

The dream61 And I saw in a dream that it was Yom Kippur. And I knew as a matter of course that every Yom Kippur a person is offered as a sacrifice–that the High Priest sacrifices him. And they asked for a person [to volunteer to be] the sacrifice, and I agreed to be the sacrifice. And they told me that I should commit myself to this in writing, and I committed myself to this in writing. Afterwards, when they wanted to offer the sacrifice,62 I changed my mind, and I wanted to hide. And I wanted63 to leave the city, and I was on my way out of the city. And as I was leaving, I came back and returned to the city.64 And I looked [and saw] that I had come back to the city. I wanted to hide among the gentile people of Moscow, and I thought that if the whole [Jewish] world65 will come and ask them to hand me over, [the non-Jews] will certainly deliver me into [the Jews’] hands.

59 Regarding this dream, see Weiss, “Kiddush Hashem UMitat HaKorban,” Mechkarim, p. 178; Horowitz, “Ha’echad meir,” p. 158. 60 In Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan in the same volume as Kuntres Yemei Hatla’ot (5693). 61 Manuscript of Rabbi Alter Tepliker, Sefer Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan, pp. 5b–6a. Quoted also in Korman’s manuscript, Jerusalem, Schocken Institute 14284, p.  5b; published in Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan (in the same volume as Yemei HaTla’ot [5693]), pp. 183–194, and also in Chayei Moharan Im Hashmatot (“Sipurim Chadashim,” end of 94). 62 Korman and Yemei HaTla’ot: “to sacrifice me.” 63 Korman and Yemei Hatla’ot: “to hide, but I saw that all the multitude are around me, and how is it possible to hide? And I wanted.” 64 Korman and Yemei HaTla’ot: “the city, and I was.” 65 Korman and Yemei HaTla’ot: “the whole world.”

304 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

And a person who agreed to be a sacrifice in my place was found. But nevertheless I am fearful about the future. And this [account] has not been written in [proper] order. Also, the conclusion is missing. And we heard that the person who agreed to be the sacrifice in his place was the rabbi of Berditchev (may his memory be for a blessing).66 [This is] because he passed away then, [soon afterwards]. And [we know] why [Rabbi Nachman] said, “I am fearful of the future,” because he too passed away the year following the death of the rabbi of Berditchev (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing).67

The elided passage appended to Yemei HaTla’ot is followed by these words: (Transcriber’s note: See Tosafot, end of Menachot, on the words “ishei of Israel.”68 And [see] the writings of the Ari [may his memory be for a blessing], that a person should not say [the word] “quickly” after “and ishei of Israel and their prayer,” etc.69 See there.70

The beginning of the dream fits closely with what is known of Rabbi Nachman’s strivings to sacrifice himself in sanctification of God’s name. Rabbi Nachman’s many prayers were accepted, and he was given the chance to literally offer himself 66 Korman: “(And it was not written in [proper] order. Also, the conclusion is missing. And we heard that the person who agreed to be the sacrifice in his place was the rabbi of Berditchev [may his memory be for a blessing].)” 67 In the Korman manuscript, the section in parentheses does not appear. 68 “And Michael, the great minister, stands and offers a sacrifice upon [the altar]” (b. Menachot 110a). There are various interpretations [of what this is speaking of]–some say [that it is speaking of] the souls of the tzaddikim and others say [that it is speaking of] sheep of fire. And that is what we [refer to] in the Shmoneh Esrei in the [blessing dealing with the Temple] service: “And the ishei of Israel and their prayer quickly in love accept with favor.” [The word ishei may be translated either as “men” or “fires.”] Tosafot According to the first interpretation, ishei is to be translated as “[important] men of,” and it refers to the souls of the tzaddikim of Israel, who serve as a sacrifice at the time of their death. And see the following note as well. 69 That would indicate a prayer to hasten the death of the “[important] men of Israel”–i.e., the tzaddikim. 70 The concern that the use of the word “quickly” seems to be a request to hasten the death of the tzaddikim arose prior to the kabbalah of the Ari. Rabbi Yaakov HaLevi, head of the Yeshiva of Worms, established after the Rhineland Massacres of 1096 that the word “quickly” should not be said, “because we are praying about the soul of the righteous that we are sacrificing,” in the context of the death of the righteous in sanctification of God’s name. This quote is taken from MS Moscow-Ginzburg 615, p. 58a, published by Grossman, which deals with the context and meaning of this enactment. See Grossman, “Shorashav shel kiddush Hashem,” pp. 128–129.)



The dream about Yom Kippur and Rabbi Nachman’s self-sacrifice 

 305

as a sacrifice on Yom Kippur by the High Priest. Rabbi Nachman answered the call for a volunteer, and he undertook in writing to serve as a sacrifice on that Yom Kippur. But here a stunning and shameful reversal occurred, which Rabbi Nachman relates openly. When Rabbi Nachman was called upon to actualize his undertaking to sacrifice himself, he changed his mind and refused. Not only did he regret having offered his life, he broke his promise and attempted to flee. He hid, left the city, returned, and discovered that there was no place to hide. In the end, Rabbi Nachman succeeded in evading his obligation thanks to the offer of someone else to give his life in Rabbi Nachman’s place. Rabbi Nachman’s concluding words, “But nevertheless I am fearful about the future,” indicate that when he told the dream, he was not done with his obligation to sacrifice his life, and he was fearful that he would be called upon to honor his commitment. It appears from this dream that all of Rabbi Nachman’s prayers regarding sacrificing his life in sanctification of God’s name came undone at the decisive moment. There was an apparent gap between Rabbi Nachman’s yearning to sacrifice himself and his commitment to realize it. At the moment of truth, Rabbi Nachman’s life-long yearning for this apotheosis abandoned him, and he fled and ran for his life. One might argue that this was only a dream that expressed Rabbi Nachman’s fear that he would fail the test on his day of judgment–i.e., that he would be unable to sacrifice himself when called upon to do so. One might say that it is impossible to extrapolate from a mere dream that his fear was ever realized, for a person can dream of doing wrong without ever doing so in actuality. One might therefore aver that it is unfair to confuse a fear that may be reflected in this dream with Rabbi Nachman’s behavior in actuality, including his readiness to give up his life in sanctification of God’s name. However, this view of a stark separation between dream and external reality is not that of Rabbi Nachman, as expressed in his writings.71 More specifically, it contradicts the view expressed in the dream itself and then Rabbi Nachman’s comment about it. Clearly, Rabbi Nachman viewed this dream as a literal occurrence. Although he volunteered and obligated himself to serve as a sacrifice in the framework of the dream, he was obligated to realize this promise in his actual life. Thus, Rabbi Nachman told his Hasidim that Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev agreed to take his place–and Rabbi Levi Yitzchak indeed died that year, a few

71 See Mark, Mysticism and Madness, pp. 5–7.

306 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

weeks later (on 25 Tishrei 5570).72 That is to say, Rabbi Nachman saw in Rabbi Levi Yitzchak’s death an outcome of Rabbi Nachman’s agreement to serve as a sacrifice in Rabbi Nachman’s place. It is thus clear that the circumstances that occurred in the dream had ramifications in reality, and that Rabbi Levi Yitzchak and Rabbi Nachman paid for their actions in the world of dreams with their lives. In Rabbi Nachman’s world there is no clear distinction between dream and external existence. The circumstances that occur in a dream are understood to be a part of reality although they occur in a different state of consciousness and on a different stratum of being. It is therefore not possible to dismiss Rabbi Nachman’s undertaking to sacrifice himself and his subsequent evasion by the fact that this occurred in a dream, for the events of that dream decided his life and death. There is therefore an apparent tension between Rabbi Nachman’s self-concept in the dream (which he chose to communicate to those close to him) and his self-concept represented in other sources, which portray him as viewing himself as someone willingly sacrificing himself in sanctification of God’s name. But this tension is ameliorated if the dream is viewed as reflecting solely a discrete event, one that was important and charged, which occurred within Rabbi Nachman about a year before his death, followed afterwards by additional developments that changed his attitude and ability to come to terms with his death until he renewed his preparedness to sacrifice himself. Rabbi Nachman’s last year of life was filled with activity and change. In the middle of that year Rabbi Nachman left Bratslav, where he had established and based his activity, and moved to Uman in order to die there. His talks that accompanied this process give the impression that he did so as he came to terms with death and prepared to meet it. Rabbi Nachman was not seeking a permanent home in Uman, for he felt–as he related–that he had already chosen a permanent place in the cemetery. Rabbi Nachman told his Hasidim that he was not interested in gaining new

72 This ties in well with the Hasidic tradition about the death of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev, as related in Toldot Kedushat Levi: It is a tradition among them that their holy elder grew weak immediately following Yom Kippur and he came close to expiring. And he prayed that his days may be extended so that he may again perform the annual commandment of the four species. And his prayer was accepted so that he remained alive until after Isru Chag and passed away on the night before the day of 25 Tishrei. Toldot Kedushat Levi, Rabbi Levi Yitzchak miBerditshav, Kedushat Levi (Munkatch edition, Jerusalem 5717), p. 43, note 103 Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev supported Rabbi Nachman and was one of those who defended him from the attacks of the Grandfather of Shpole. See Weiss, “Yachaso shel Rabbi Levi Yitzchak miBerditshav leRebbe Nachman,” Mechkarim, pp.  36–41; Green, Tormented Master, pp. 110–113.



Rabbi Nachman’s final days 

 307

adherents, because his focus was now on the rectification of dead souls. This statement expresses the state of mind of a person who feels more connected to the world of the dead than to that of the living. The process described in the two previous chapters supports this thesis. Only after Rabbi Nachman revealed the ten chapters of psalms and related “The Story of the Sixth Beggar” did he feel ready to move to Uman in order to die there–a move that expressed his coming to terms with his imminent death. It appears that Rabbi Nachman’s sense that he had fulfilled his mission in this world helped him come to terms with his self-sacrifice, without any additional attempt to evade death.

9 Rabbi Nachman’s final days Before turning to Rabbi Natan’s descriptions of Rabbi Nachman’s final days, I wish to comment on the nature of his hagiographical style. Rabbi Nachman’s life was filled with ascents and descents, all of which Rabbi Natan described faithfully and in great detail. Rabbi Natan did not refrain from describing Rabbi Nachman in his “small” moments, even those that take the reader aback: the times during which Rabbi Nachman was unable to teach Torah, the incidents in which he burst out weeping before his Hasidim, his anger and rebukes, and his acts of foolishness and smallness that he engaged in during his journey to the land of Israel. Rabbi Natan’s approach posits first and foremost that all of Rabbi Nachman’s deeds, whether or not they are in tune with accepted norms, are holy, and therefore one should not attempt to embellish or revise them, but describe them as they are. This view created a hagiography that is reliable and precise (something that does not generally characterize hagiographic literature).73 Bratslav Hasidim preferred to preserve in unpublished records statements and incidents that they feared would arouse the fire of dispute rather than alter them and pervert their spirit. (The dream about Yom Kippur, which reveals Rabbi Nachman in his weakness as he flees his mission, is an excellent example of this.) Therefore, there is no reason to doubt Rabbi Natan’s descriptions of Rabbi Nachman in the last months of his life, even though these descriptions come from a stunned and emotion-racked heart. Rabbi Nachman’s extraordinary tranquility during his final days stands out in Rabbi Natan’s description. Aware of his impending death, Rabbi Nachman serenely accepted it with trust in God at a time that he was suffering unbear73 Regarding the unusual reliability of the Bratslavian hagiographical literature produced by Rabbi Natan, see Dan, HaSipur HaChasidi, pp. 184–188.

308 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

able physical torment, and discussed it with his Hasidim. Rabbi Nachman was no longer fleeing death and no longer feared it. He radiated confidence and calm, made his final arrangements, and encouraged his worried Hasidim. I will quote a few examples. And afterwards [Rabbi Nachman] reminded himself and took the key to the bookshelf (kamde) and handed it over. And he told them that as soon as he passed away, while he was [still] lying on the ground, they should take all of [his] writings in the bookshelf and burn them all. And he admonished them to obey his words. And they took the key and stood in shock, trembling, shivering and suffering greatly as they heard all of this. And they whispered to each other that he was already preparing himself so completely to pass away. He spoke up: “Why are you whispering? You are free to speak of my passing away in front of me, because I don’t fear it at all.” And afterwards he told them, “Perhaps you are speaking about yourselves. [But] why should you be afraid that I am leaving you? … You have no reason to be frightened.”74 And he lay on his bed with great freedom and he took a ball of wax or the like and rolled it between his fingers and engaged in awesome thoughts, as is the way of great people who, as they ponder something, roll wax between their fingers. And [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) was accustomed to do this occasionally at the end of his days. And even on that last day in that last hour, he was deeply absorbed in his awesome thoughts, and he rolled something in his holy hands with wondrous, beautiful and awesome freedom, clarity, and lucidity, the like of which has never been seen…. And this continued from the time that he lay on his bed until he breathed his last–a little more than three hours.75

The impression made by descriptions is that in his last months Rabbi Nachman met his death like a person realizing his goal with a whole heart and a tranquil spirit.76 Whereas in the dream about Yom Kippur Rabbi Nachman had run about in confusion with the feeling that he has nowhere to escape, that wherever he goes he will be captured, he now radiated a sense of “wondrous freedom … the like of which was never seen.” In place of the terror of death and the fear that remained with Rabbi Nachman even after the end of the dream, when he stated that “I am fearful about the future,” now he stated decisively, “I don’t fear it at

74 Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 59, pp. 86–87. 75 Ibid., 63, pp. 91–92. 76 In Tormented Master, Green adopted in full Rabbi Natan’s description of this last period of Rabbi Nachman’s life and of his death, with which he concluded the biographical portion of his book. See Green, Tormented Master, pp. 275–282.



Rabbi Nachman’s final days 

 309

all.” Rabbi Nachman also encouraged his Hasidim, “You have no reason to be frightened.” The impression that Rabbi Nachman was now prepared to sacrifice himself in order to fulfill his goal of rectifying souls is expressed explicitly by Rabbi Natan in a description, part of which was quoted before: Following the Sabbath, the second night of Succot…: [Rabbi Nachman] said, his voice slightly raised, “Do you recall the story that I told?” And immediately I stood trembling and I asked him in awe, “Which story?” … He said, “The story that I told you when I came here.” And immediately I was stunned, because I remembered well the story that tells how the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) came to a place where there were many great souls that he had to rectify, and he saw that it would only be possible to rectify them with his death…. That is to say that here in Uman Rabbi Nachman is surrounded by many tens of thousands upon tens of thousands of souls, which now stand around him so that he may rectify them, for which reason he experiences all of [his] difficult and bitter torments and sufferings. And afterwards he turned his face slightly to the wall and slightly spread out his hands, as if to say, “Behold, I give over my soul, and I am ready to accept everything for the sake [of God], may He be blessed.”77

In the light of Rabbi Nachman’s dream about Yom Kippur, his comparison of the Baal Shem Tov to himself possesses additional, intriguing aspects. According to the version of the story as it appears in Rabbi Naftali’s manuscript of Chayei Moharan, the Baal Shem Tov was called upon to sacrifice his life in order to rectify the souls of the departed that had no other way of rectification, but he was rescued from death in the merit of two wayfarers “who were very great tzaddikim. And they accepted half [of the burden], and [the other half] half remained with the Baal Shem Tov. And in this way, the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) was saved. And it appears that these two [travelers] (mentioned above) suffered damage as a result of this.”78 This is clearly similar to Rabbi Nachman’s experience: at first, he volunteered to be a public sacrifice, but he found it difficult to actualize his readiness to sacrifice himself, and he was saved from death only in the merit of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak, who took his place as one of “the great true tzaddikim [who] died in sanctifica77 Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 58, p. 85. 78 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiato VIshivato B’Umin,” 190 [60]), p. 215, with the addition of an elision found in Rabbi Naftali’s manuscript of Chayei Moharan.

310 

 Uman – “Behold, I Give Over my Soul”

tion of [God’s] name even when they died on their beds,”79 and who in so doing bequeathed another year of life upon Rabbi Nachman. The same occurred with the Baal Shem Tov: when he was called upon to sacrifice his life in order to rectify the souls of the dead, he grew depressed and he succeeded in breaking out of that state only because he received the assistance of two great tzaddikim who agreed to accept half of the burden and cost of rectifying the souls of the dead. “And in this way, the Baal Shem Tov (may his memory be for a blessing) was saved.” These two tzaddikim were apparently harmed immediately, but when and how the Baal Shem Tov had to repay his half of the rectification is not related. In contrast, Rabbi Nachman knew that his time had come to sacrifice himself with pain and suffering in order to rectify the tens of thousands upon tens of thousands of souls that sought their rectification from him. It seems that Rabbi Natan’s witnessing of Rabbi Nachman’s awareness of his impending death, as Rabbi Natan stayed with him “from the time that he lay on his bed until he breathed his last,” left a great impression upon Rabbi Natan, an impression that informs his words, “The great true tzaddikim died in sanctification of [God’s] name even when they died on their beds. [That is] because all the days of their lives they sacrificed themselves in sanctification of [God’s] name a number on various levels–particularly, at their end, when they literally passed away.”80 This view that Rabbi Nachman died as someone giving up his life in sanctification of God’s name corresponds closely to the view of Rabbi Nachman as someone who came to complete the rectification of the ten sages killed by the Roman government, and through them to rectify and elevate all of the sparks and souls that have not yet attained rectification, who are all reincarnations of the ten drops of Joseph’s seed: The great tzaddik dies in sanctification of [God’s] Name, because all of the days of his life he sacrificed himself every day in sanctification of [God’s] name. And in particular, at the time of his literal death he certainly dies in sanctification of [God’s] Name…. That corresponds to the ten [sages] killed by the [Roman] government, through whose agency all of the sparks from the husks until this moment and until the [messianic] conclusion are extracted.81

After a long and complex path, which began in Rabbi Nachman’s youth when in his every prayer he asked God to let him die in sanctification of God’s name, a path in the course of which he experienced various descents and failures in which he 79 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 2 (“Choshen Mishpat: Hilkhot Matnat Shekhiv Meyra,” 5), p. 18. And see above, note 56. 80 Ibid. 81 Likutei Halakhot, Volume 3 (“Orach Chaim: Hilkhot Chol HaMoed,” 4:15), p. 191.



Rabbi Nachman’s final days 

 311

fled his mission, Rabbi Nachman ultimately succeeded in realizing his strivings to sacrifice himself “for the sake [of God], be He blessed.” In his self-sacrificial death, a death in sanctification of God’s name, Rabbi Nachman completed the final stage in the enterprise of rectifications that he established, at whose center are the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification. With the sacrifice of his soul in Uman’s valley of slaughter, among tens of thousands of souls massacred in sanctification of God’s name, he made it possible for others to attain the final rectification that he had established in his lifetime–the pilgrimage to his grave–which became one of the central avenues for universal rectification. Rabbi Nachman coupled to this rectification his personal assurance that he will assist every person who goes on pilgrimage to his grave and performs all of the details of the rectification, even pulling that person out of gehennom by his sidelocks–a rectification and promise that is made possible solely due to his own death in sanctification of God’s name, his death being the final and decisive stage that enables the establishment of the rectifications and their actualization from the time of his death and forever afterward. The next and final chapter of this book will be dedicated to the ways in which Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications have been realized since his death, and to the significant developments that have occurred in them since his death and to the present day.

Chapter Nine Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification: The Pilgrimage to Uman on Rosh Hashanah, the Worldwide Universal Rectification, Tashlikh and Body Jewelry 1 Introduction Over the years, Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications have changed and developed, until they have attained their present form. The rectification for a nocturnal emission was at first presented as the recitation of ten chapters of psalms, without mention of any specific ten; only years later did Rabbi Nachman designate the psalms to be recited. The original universal rectification, which had an ascetic character, was exchanged for one whose redemptive and active ingredients are an exalted spirit and a yearning to be elevated–without any requirement to contend with the body. Rabbi Nachman presented a number of universal rectifications: in order to rectify speech, conversation in praise of tzaddikim; and in order to rectify one’s relationship with money, earning money with the intent to give charity. Only years later, in his final days, did he add pilgrimage to his grave as an additional avenue of effecting a universal rectification.1 In addition, after Rabbi Nachman’s death, developments continued in the rectifications and in the ways that Bratslav Hasidim strove to keep them meaningful. I will address a number of these changes later, with a particular focus on developments of 5760–5769 (2000–2010). It is impossible to differentiate between the most recent developments in the rectifications and the considerable success that Bratslav Hasidism has enjoyed in the last few decades. Therefore, I will begin by discussing Bratslav Hasidism’s expansion and the revolution in Rabbi Nachman’s status that have taken place in the last few decades.2 Since this chapter discusses incidents and changes that are currently occurring, its character will differ from that of previous chapters.

1 As explained above in Chapter 4. 2 A full analysis of the revival of Hasidism in general and of Bratslav in particular must address the flourishing of mysticism and the New Age movement in Israel and across the world, something beyond the scope of this book.



The flourishing renaissance of Bratslav Hasidism 

 313

2 The flourishing renaissance of Bratslav Hasidism Bratslav Hasidism is one of the more prominent groups to have gained by the awakening of interest in mysticism and kabbalah in Israel in the last third of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first century. Today Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav is an Israeli cultural icon, known to all and wielding considerable influence. His creative output, both homiletical and literary, is a lively part of Israeli culture. His writings arouse scholarly interest and are studied by a variety of audiences, serving as sources of inspiration for musicians, authors, playwrights and philosophers.3 A variety of publishers print books associated with Rabbi Nachman’s teachings. There is a steady growth of Bratslav yeshivas and communities, as well as yeshivas and communities that, although they do not identify themselves as Bratslav, have a deep affinity with Rabbi Nachman. In Israeli media, celebrities from the worlds of entertainment and communication express an interest in and closeness to Rabbi Nachman. They go on pilgrimage to his grave and blend materials from his creativity into their own. And this phenomenon itself has received literary and cinematic treatment.4 A traveler visiting Israel at the beginning of the twenty-first century cannot help but encounter the presence of Bratslav; walls are graffitied with the slogan, “Na, Nach, Nachma, Nachman Mei’Uman,” skullcaps of a style specific to Bratslav Hasidim are seen everywhere, Rabbi Nachman’s books and recordings of lectures by Bratslav figures are sold everywhere, and in city centers Bratslav Hasidim emerge from vans to dance on the street with unrestrained joy.

3 Regarding this, see Pinchas-Cohen, “Gibor tarbut akhshavi”; Assaf, “Mavo,” Bibliografyah, pp.  9–14. In the realm of philosophy, three thinkers whose principal source of inspiration is Rabbi Nachman are Rabbi Shagar (Keilim Shevurim; Pur Hu HaGoral), Eliezer Malkiel (Chokhmah UTmimut; Masa El HaSod) and Dov Elbaum (Into the Fullness of the Void). 4 One example is the film Ushpizin (2004), made by Shuli Rand after he became a Bratslav Hasid. This phenomenon is presented as well in other films, such as Ha’Asonot Shel Nina (Shevi Gabizon, 2003). Yippee, a film by Hollywood director Paul Mazursky, documents his participation in the pilgrimage to Uman for Rosh Hashanah 5766. In the realm of literature, Aaron Megged’s Persephone Remembers (2000) features an Israeli woman singer who has become religious and moved with her husband, a Bratslav Hasid, to Safed. The bestseller Mekimi (2007), by Noa Yaron-Dayan, tells the story of how she became religious and, more specifically, a Bratslav Hasid. Two other efforts worth mentioning are Rabbi Erez Moshe Doron’s fantasy novel, The Warriors of Transcendence (2008), and Shuli Rand’s musical album, Nekudah Tovah, permeated by Bratslav values and written in a distinctly Bratslav idiom.

314 

 Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

Between past and present The flourishing of Bratslav Hasidism is a recent phenomenon. In contrast to old Hasidic bastions such as Gur, Satmar and Chabad, which built and preserved their strength throughout many generations, Bratslav’s present situation is entirely new. To underscore this, I will briefly address the Jewish world’s degree of acceptance–or, more properly, lack of acceptance–of Bratslav Hasidism from the beginning of its existence until the present. The dispute against Rabbi Nachman began at an early stage of his activity as a Hasidic tzaddik, and accompanied him until the day of his death. He was persecuted by the Grandfather, Rabbi Aryeh Leib of Shpole, who was one of the elder admorim in Ukraine at the time of the dispute; and he had disputes with other figures as well, among them his uncle Rabbi Borukh of Mezhibozh. Rabbi Nachman felt persecuted, and was even forced to leave his home in Zlatipolia. In Chapter 8, I discussed how even in his final days Rabbi Nachman felt that his enemies were spilling his blood and causing his death.5 After Rabbi Nachman died and Rabbi Natan of Nemirov became the leading figure of Bratslav Hasidism, the dispute broke out again, this time under the direction of Rabbi Moshe Tzvi of Savran. Bratslav Hasidim were violently persecuted, and Rabbi Natan was denounced to the authorities, leading to his interment. When Bratslav Hasidim tried to gather together on Rosh Hashanah at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite in Uman, they were met by curses and pelted with stones.6 Even after Rabbi Natan’s death, the opposition to Bratslav was not assuaged. Although Bratslav Hasidism was small and its existence could not threaten other Hasidic groups, it was dogged by dispute throughout its existence. Until the second half of the twentieth century, Bratslav Hasidism was a marginal Hasidic group, insulted and persecuted, with few adherents. Even when physical persecutions abated, Bratslav Hasidism was not recognized as a legitimate Hasidic group and remained an object of derision and hostility.7 In the first half of the century–and in particular between the two world wars– persecution of Bratslav Hasidism relented and new members began to join its ranks–not only in the Ukraine, its birthplace, but also in Poland. Among the influential Bratslav Hasidim in Poland were Rabbi Aharon Tsigelman and Rabbi Yitzchak Breiter, who published and distributed Rabbi Nachman’s teachings and attracted new adherents. Bratslav shtieblekh (small synagogues) were established 5 See Mark, “Lama radaf haRav miSavran,” at the beginning of the essay and the sources cited there in note 1. 6 See ibid., pp. 487–500. 7 See Assaf, “Adayin lo nishkat hariv,” pp. 465–466.



The flourishing renaissance of Bratslav Hasidism 

 315

in Warsaw, Lublin, Lodz and Cracow. The kibbutz, the annual Rosh Hashanah gathering, met in Lublin, Poland, in the building of Yeshiva Chokhmei Lublin with the permission of the dean, Rabbi Meir Shapira (founder of the Daf Yomi daily Talmud study program), who joined them in prayer. Not everyone approved of the welcome that Rabbi Meir Shapira accorded the Bratslav Hasidim, but the fact that he, holding an elevated position, gave them his seal of approval and friendship, influenced others as well.8 The Second World War, the Holocaust and communist rule threatened to erase Bratslav Hasidism, as a community and as an active Hasidic movement. A small coterie of Bratslav Hasidim survived in the land of Israel, particularly in Jerusalem and Safed. The larger and more influential Jerusalem faction was founded by Rabbi Avraham b. Rabbi Nachman Chazan’s students, who arrived in 5660 in answer to his call to “come to the land of Israel without delay.”9 Among these students were Rabbi Eliyahu Chaim Rozin, who was the head of the Bratslav yeshiva in Meah Shearim. His own student, Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Bender, came to the land of Israel after the Holocaust and became Bratslav’s most prominent leader and mentor until his death in 5749. In Safed, Rabbi Gedaliah Koenig, a student of Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz (great-grandson of Rabbi Natan), established a Bratslav center. And another center arose later in Bnei Brak, focused on the Bratslav study hall. From the 1970s and onward, there has been a revolution in the status of Rabbi Nachman and Bratslav Hasidism in Israeli culture and in the Jewish world at large. Thousands of new followers with no previous connection to Bratslav Hasidism have joined its various factions, and today these newcomers constitute the majority of Bratslav Hasidim. Bratslav yeshivas and communities have been founded across Israel. Bratslav Hasidism has split into a number of factions with various practices and perspectives. For the first time since its founding, Bratslav Hasidism is no longer a small and persecuted movement but a large and influential Hasidic group.  Rabbi Nachman’s status as a tzaddik has undergone an even more far-reaching change. From an ostracized figure whose greatness was recognized by no more than a handful of his Hasidim, he has been transformed into a tzaddik for the generations, one who is accepted by and serves as a source of inspiration 8 For testimony regarding the kibbutz in Lublin and the growth of Bratslav Hasidism at this time, see Kronah, Morai VeRabotai, pp. 39–44. 9 Regarding this group, see the appendix to Siddur HaShalem, Makor Chokhmah, published by Rabbi Yehoshua Heschel Friedman, who was a student of Rabbi Shimshon Barsky and belonged to the group led by Rabbi Avraham ben Rabbi Nachman (Part 2, Shabbatot VeChagim: “L’Zeikher Olam,” unpaginated end of the book).

316 

 Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

for broad circles of non-Bratslavers.10 The most prominent expression of this occurs on Rabbi Nachman’s holiday, Rosh Hashanah, when tens of thousands of Hasidim, joined by many other adherents of Rabbi Nachman, gather to celebrate the beginning of the new year with him.

The connection between the blossoming of Bratslav and messianism Many Bratslav sources indicate a close connection between Rabbi Nachman’s gaining recognition and the advent of the arrival of the messiah. The Bratslav revolution is thus seen as a messianic revolution. “We have a tradition that our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) said: ‘When my book is accepted by the world, it will be possible to prepare for the messiah.’”11 Now, when Rabbi Nachman’s books are well-received by all types of Jews, the time has come to prepare for the coming of the messiah.

10 An interesting example of this is the place that Rabbi Nachman occupies in the series “Am HaSefer” (Yediot Acharonot Publishing), an attempt to create “a series of outstanding creative works … with the goal of granting representation to a variety of avenues of Jewish creativity across the generations … of the basic cultural treasures of Israel” (from the back cover)–works that belong in every Jewish home. In this series, two volumes are dedicated to the Hasidic movement: one to Hasidism in general (with representative teachings of the Baal Shem Tov, the Maggid of Mezeritch and Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi), and the other entirely to the output of Rabbi Nachman (Rebbe Nachman MiBreslav: Torot, Sichot, Sipurei Ma’asiyot, 2009). The editor’s introduction contains the passage, “It appears that among the greatest Jewish thinkers in recent generations, there is no one whose teachings are the object of so many different interpretations: academic or mystical and spiritual. His books are published and studied across the world, and his gravesite in Uman in the Ukraine has become a site of pilgrimage for tens of thousands of Jews of all stripes” (ibid., p. 8). 11 Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 3, 187, p. 83. And similarly in Chayei Moharan: [Rabbi Nachman stated with] his holy mouth that his holy book, Likutei Moharan, which was published, constitutes the beginning of the redemption…. And he said that learning his holy compositions constitutes the beginning of the redemption. [May it come] quickly in our days, amen. Chayei Moharan Im HaHashmatot (5760) (“Ma’alat Torato USfarav HaKedoshim,” 341 [(7]), pp. 313–310 And again: Transcriber’s note: Regarding the concealment of the great and wondrous light of admor (may his memory be for a blessing) … may it be [God’s] will that the truth will be revealed in the world and that his holiness will be made known in the world. And then the redemption will come. [May it come] quickly, in our days, amen. Chayei Moharan (“Inyan HaMachloket She’Alav,” 402), p. 344–345



The flourishing renaissance of Bratslav Hasidism 

 317

The feeling of renaissance and revelation inspires Bratslav Hasidim of all factions; but the messianic fervor is especially strong among the new factions that came into being in the second half of the twentieth century, which focus their attention on messianism. Since I have discussed this elsewhere,12 I will limit myself here to a brief overview. There are two factions in Bratslav with a particularly strong messianic fervor. One consists of the followers of Rabbi Yisroel Odesser–those who believe in the petek, the ‘note.’ Rabbi Yisroel Odesser (1888–1994) related that one day when he opened a religious book a note fell out that, he realized, had been sent to him by Rabbi Nachman. Among other things, the note contained the phrase, “Na Nach Nachma Nachman Mei’Uman.” This has become a mantra for his followers, and is even written in amulets. The note also contained the sentence, “My fire will burn until the coming of the messiah.” Rabbi Yisroel believed, as do his followers, that the phrase “Na Nach…” constitutes the song that Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav said that he will sing when the redeemer comes (Likutei Moharan II 8), and they have dubbed it “the song of redemption.” Initially, Rabbi Yisroel’s followers believed that the note indicated that he would live to see the messiah, and the longer he lived, the stronger their faith in him and in the note grew, and their hope for the imminent arrival of the messiah intensified. Rabbi Israel Odesser told his followers about other notes that he had received, which also focused on the messianic hope. One of these notes is purported to have stated, “The time of the redemption is very near.”13 After his death at the age of 106, his followers’ emphasis shifted to the faith that repeating the phrase, “Na Nach Nachma Nachman Mei’Uman,” and publicizing it plays a key role in hastening the redemption. This faith explains the great efforts that they have made to spread this phrase in every possible way. Their efforts overall have met with great success, and the phrase is known far beyond the boundaries of their community, such that it appears that there is no one in the entire state of Israel who has not seen or heard about the note.14 (The traditional stream of Bratslav Hasidism strongly opposes all stories about the petek, and regards it as a forgery that has created a desecration of God’s name and constitutes an insult to Rabbi Nachman and his Hasidim.)

12 Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 171–180. 13 Bezanson, Ga’agu’im, p. 160. 14 Regarding the success of this campaign, Jonathan Garb writes: An onlooker from another planet might conclude, following a visit to the urban centers of Israel or after taking a ride on its highways, that [the phrase, “Na Nach Nachma Nachman Mei’Uman,”] is one of the central tenets of the Jewish religion. The Chosen Will Become Herds (text in the Hebrew edition only, p. 153

318 

 Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

Another neo-Bratslav faction with a messianic fervor explicitly linked to the revolution in the status of Bratslav Hasidism is led by Rabbi Eliezer Shlomo Schick, whose followers are located chiefly in Yavne’el in the Galilee and in New York. Mendel Piekarz15 has shown that Rabbi Schick sees himself as a revolutionary religious-messianic leader who began his career in 5725. In that year, Rabbi Schick began to attract many young people and to distribute copies of Rabbi Nachman’s books and his own popularizations of Rabbi Nachman’s teachings in the tens of thousands. Their very distribution, he states, is “one of the indications that our redemption is near.”16 Rabbi Schick indicated the year 5736 as one in which the messiah might have been revealed but for the fact that other Bratslav leaders waged a harsh campaign against him. That caused the delay of “the great opportunity in 5736 for the revelation of the king messiah and the revelation of the light of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing).”17 Despite the delay, however, Rabbi Schick and his followers have not despaired of their messianic task, and they distribute the teachings of Rabbi Nachman with great energy until “everyone will engage in prayer and in hitbodedut … and therefore, everyone will be a Bratslav Hasid,”18 as a result of which they will attain “revelation of the king messiah and revelation of the light of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing).”19 Rabbi Schick’s group is at loggerheads with the traditional school of Bratslav Hasidim, which has not acknowledged Rabbi Schick’s unique mission and has instead protested against his presumption and a number of his statements, declaring that “the view of the sages is not in alignment with them.” 20 A sense of the renaissance and revolution that has occurred exists as well among the more traditional factions of Bratslav Hasidism. These include the great majority of Bratslav Hasidim who came from Bratslav families or other chareidi (ultra-Orthodox) families, as well as the central faction of baalei teshuvah (pen15 Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, pp. 199–218. 16 P’ulat HaTzaddik (Jerusalem), p. 722. And see also 928, p. 611. 17 Asher BaNachal, Volume 3, p. 43. Quoted and discussed by Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, p. 217. 18 Asher BaNachal, Volume 3, p. 47. 19 Ibid., p. 43. Cited and discussed by Piekarz, Chasidut Breslav, p. 217. 20 “The World Council of Breslov Hasidim” distributed a public declaration against “the note … that was forged by a few people” and against the booklets that Rabbi Schick writes and distributes (although he is not mentioned by name), stating that “the spirit of the sages is not comfortable with some of them…. Therefore, let it be known that not every book or booklet that bears the name Bratslav is indeed so.” See the Sabbath weekly, Nachalei HaShabbat, MiTorato Shel Rabbeinu Nachman MiBreslav, Zekhuto Yagein Aleinu, Issue 18 (Jerusalem, Parshat Tazria-Metzora 5756). Cited by Assaf, Bibliografyah, pp. 84–85.



The flourishing renaissance of Bratslav Hasidism 

 319

itents), the students of Rabbi Eliezer Berland (dean of Yeshiva Shuvu Banim). In addition, there are the students of his disciple, Rabbi Shalom Arush (head of the Chut Shel Chesed Institution), and other, smaller groups. In their talks, the rabbis of these factions express their wonder at the sight of so many people coming on pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, seeing it as a clear expression of the great awakening and growing recognition of his greatness and holiness. These talks frequently mention various statements by Rabbi Nachman to the effect that he foresaw the day when the masses will go on pilgrimage to his grave and police will be needed to organize them in order to prevent chaos.21 These talks express a messianic hope and encourage their listeners to come to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite and intensify their spiritual activities in order to elevate themselves. However, they do not specifically designate the present time as a messianic era. Although the topic of messianism exists, it is peripheral, and positive developments are seen as a reason for hope, not as definite proof that the redeemer has already arrived. Among the older factions there are also small groups whose literature contains a marked messianic fervor; nevertheless, in contrast to the neo-Bratslav groups described above, their writings on these topics are allusive and esoteric, tending to blur the crucial nature and meaning of the messianic process.22 It seems that the traditional factions have greater patience for ongoing and slow processes than do the neo-Bratslav factions, which proclaim that the time of the redemption is close at hand. Nevertheless, all factions share the view that a direct connection exists linking the spreading of Rabbi Nachman’s teachings and recognition of his greatness with the advent of the messianic era.23

21 The manuscript of Chayei Moharan in the handwriting of Moharanat (may his memory be for a blessing) contained the statement that a time will come when people will travel from all over the world on the eve of Rosh Hashanah to prostrate themselves at the gravesite of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing). And the crowd will be so great that it will be necessary to appoint guards and police to supervise the public so that there will not be a great delay, and space will be cleared for those who come after them. Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 5, 125, p. 49 22 Regarding the connection between the large number of people coming to Uman on Rosh Hashanah and the approaching redemption, see MiReishit V’Ad Acharit, pp. 4–7. 23 This is expressed repeatedly in the periodical M’Or HaNachal, from which I will quote a few examples: And now with the fullness of days … the day of the redemption is coming closer … with the revelation of the light of the two great luminaries, [Rabbi Nachman and Rabbi Natan,] upon the face of the earth. M’Or HaNachal 42 (Tishrei 5763): p. 10 Another essay concludes:

320 

 Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

3 The ten chapters of psalms, from the rectification for a nocturnal emission to the universal rectification–from ritual to amulet Chapter 4 showed that the rectification for a nocturnal emission consists of the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms designated by Rabbi Nachman, and that the recitation of these psalms is only related to the universal rectification when it is performed as part of the pilgrimage to his grave (along with giving charity for the elevation of his soul). Rabbi Nachman did not say that reciting the ten chapters of psalms in and of itself is a universal rectification, nor was this idea ever expressed by Rabbi Natan of Nemirov or Rabbi Nachman, the rabbi of Tcherin. However, at a certain stage the masses identified the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms with the universal rectification. As a result, the properties of the universal rectification were attributed to the recitation of these ten psalms– i.e., the belief that such recitation can rectify all sins and blemishes–even if that rectification does not occur at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite. The distinction between the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification was thus entirely blurred.24 It appears that the combination of a number of factors led to this blurring of concepts. The first factor is the fact that the recitation of the same ten psalms that functions as the rectification for a nocturnal emission also occurs as part of the universal rectification performed on pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave. Thus an association was formed between the recitation of these ten psalms and the

The teachings of our holy rebbe are now distributed literally to all ends of the earth, and the ultimate end is quickly coming closer…. Fortunate is the person who will merit to take part in bringing the redemption! Ibid., p. 98 An article entitled, “It is Possible to Prepare for the Messiah” describes the enterprise of distributing Rabbi Nachman’s books and its impressive success, and ends with the following words: Understand that the tzaddik is presently preparing the world for the complete redemption with an accelerated tempo…. The heart sings and the end is closer than it has ever been before. “When the majority of the world will accept my books, it is already possible to prepare for the messiah.”… Thus said our holy rebbe. We can state confidently that there was never yet a time in which the world has so enthusiastically welcomed the books of our holy rebbe. And that being the case … there is no [sign of] the end more clear than this. Therefore, gentlemen, it is possible to prepare for the messiah!” Ibid. 41 (Tevet 5761): p. 53 24 See for example HaTikun HaKlali HaMeforash (“Mavo”), pp. 7–8.



The ten chapters of psalms 

 321

universal rectification, ignoring the fact that the universal rectification requires pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite. A second factor was the elision of the phrase, “to be at his grave,” from the discussion of the rectifications and the revelation of the ten chapters of psalms published in Sichot Haran (141). Because of this elision, Rabbi Nachman’s statement, “but the above-mentioned rectification is the universal rectification”25 was thought to relate to the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms in and of themselves, and not to the recitation specifically at his gravesite.26 A third factor was the publishing of the ten chapters of psalms in 5581 by Rabbi Natan’s son, Rabbi Shachna, under the title, The Universal Rectification. It appears that Rabbi Shachna published this booklet for the convenience of those who came on pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite; but as a result, the body of ten psalms itself began to be called the universal rectification, without association to the context in which it is to be recited. Rabbi Natan himself did not know about his son’s initiative to publish this booklet.27 These factors contributed to the blurring of the distinction between the rectification for a nocturnal emission and the universal rectification. And that blurring led to an expansion of the claims for the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms far beyond that which Rabbi Nachman had established. I engaged a number of Bratslav rabbis in conversation on this matter, and they responded in a variety of ways. Some of them, after looking into the matter, agreed that reciting the ten chapters of psalms can serve as a universal rectification only if it occurs at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite. However, a few leading rabbis argued that the recitation of the ten chapters even outside the framework of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite constitutes the universal rectification. They said that reciting the ten chapters of psalms serves not only as a rectification for a nocturnal emission but as a rectification of the covenant overall–and, as such, it functions as a universal rectification. My conversation on this matter with Rabbi Eliezer Berland, dean of Yeshiva Shuvu Banim, also touched upon “The Story of the Armor.” Rabbi Berland argued that “The Story of the Armor,” which alludes to the recitation of the ten chapters of psalms, relates not only to a blemish caused by a nocturnal emission but also to willful blemishes of the covenant. And so reciting the ten chapters of psalms not only rectifies a nocturnal emission but other sins and blemishes as well.

25 Sichot Haran, 141, p. 180. 26 I dealt with this at length in Chapter 4. 27 “My son Shachna (may he live) published the universal rectification without my knowledge” (Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 99, p. 119). And see also Naveh Tzaddikim, pp. 66–67.

322 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

And Rabbi Eliezer Koenig, leader of the Bratslav community in Safed, argued that although a straightforward reading of Rabbi Nachman’s teachings and talks does not indicate that reciting the ten chapters of psalms is effective for anything but rectifying a blemish caused by a nocturnal emission, he has received a tradition that reciting these psalms–even not at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite–can serve as a universal rectification. He added that Bratslav Hasidim had the custom of reciting these ten chapters for many reasons–not only at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite and not only to rectify a nocturnal emission. There is reason to think that these latter rabbis view this topic as a practical matter with significant real-world consequences. Limiting the power of reciting the ten chapters of psalms by claiming that it does not have the ability to serve as a universal rectification that repairs purposefully-committed sins might undermine an important tool that otherwise encourages many people seeking to repent. Thus, these rabbis are reluctant to issue a statement on this matter, lest they take a stance liable to close the gates of repentance. Therefore, a rabbi might decide not to constrict the force attributed to the ten chapters of psalms, but rather rely instead on the fact that their recitation has been generally accepted as a universal rectification and on the dictum that “the custom of Israel is Torah.”28 Bratslav Hasidim testify that the process of expanding the attribution of properties to the recitation of the ten chapters began in previous generations. They believe that there is significance in reciting these ten chapters at all times–not only as a rectification for a nocturnal emission and not only at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite. Thus, for example, many Hasidim recite the ten chapters daily,29 and on the Sabbath they customarily recite the universal rectification after musaf as a community, led by the cantor. It is also customary to recite these ten chapters whenever the recitation of psalms in general is called for, such as on behalf of a sick person and in a time of trouble. Women as well as men have the custom of reciting these psalms.30

Acceptance of the rectifications By the beginning of the twentieth century, a number of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications and counsels were accepted outside the limited circle of his Hasidim–in particular, as a contribution to the kabbalistic repository of rectifications.31 28 Shulchan Arukh (“Yoreh Deah” 242:30). 29 Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 4, 96, p. 37. 30 Tikun HaKlali HaMeforash (“Mavo”), p. 8. 31 See above, Introduction to Part 2 , footnote 3.



The ten chapters of psalms 

 323

In recent years, the rectification of reciting the ten psalms has been accepted by many who are not Bratslav Hasidim. It has been published numerous times–in particular, as small, pocketsize booklets. These are distributed free of charge, and may be found in many synagogues and study halls, as well as at the gravesites of tzaddikim who have no connection to Bratslav Hasidism. Some of them contain a long list of approbations from non-Bratslav rabbis, who recommend reciting what they refer to as the “universal rectification”–among these by Rabbi Chaim Palagi and two former Chief Rabbis of Israel, Rabbi Shlomo Amar and Rabbi Ovadia Yosef.32 Another interesting phenomenon that has spurred the spread of the rectification is the large number of popular musical treatments that it has received. Most of these are in the Middle Eastern idiom of piyut and song.33 A vanguard in this area was Erez Yechiel’s album, Tikun HaKlali. This album attained extraordinary success, bringing the universal rectification into the cultural landscape. After that, more than ten well-known Eastern musicians composed and performed the chapters of the “universal rectification” on the album, Meitav Amanei Yisrael Sharim Tikun HaKlali.34 Many other such compositions have been composed. These disks are distributed at highway junctions and sold in gas stations and music stores, and have attained broad circulation, proclaiming the wondrous property of reciting and hearing the ten chapters. Of course such recitation is made without connection to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite in Uman and without connection to a rectification for a nocturnal emission, but as an action that possesses many properties that can help every individual in every situation.35 Another new development is the marketing of booklets containing the “universal rectification” to be used as an amulet that magically assists the person who carries it even if he does not recite the psalms. The effectiveness of such a booklet is not limited to the rectification of any particular blemish; rather, it first and

32 Some other approbations are by the kabbalist Rabbi Chaim Sinwani, the admor Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum, Rabbi Yitzchak Yaakov Weiss (av beit din [chief judicial authority] of the Eidah HaChareidit in Jerusalem), and Rabbi Reuven Elbaz. See Tikun HaKlali (Even Shetiah), pp. 27–31. 33 For example, Erez Yechiel, Amir Benyon, Shimon Mashali (Nishmat Kol Chai VeHaTikun HaKlali HaMefursam), and Guy Mintz. 34 Meitav Amanei Yisrael Sharim Tikun HaKlali. Among the artists on this album are Erez Yechiel, Yaniv Dahari, Lior Narkis, Nati Levi, Chaim Yisrael and Sagiv Cohen. 35 This phenomenon was reported in an episode of Uvdah, on Israeli television’s Channel Two, by investigative reporter Ilana Dayan (directed by Guy Asif and Srulik Einhorn, 3 November 2006). According to this program, more than a quarter of a million copies of Erez Yechiel’s Tikun HaKlali had been distributed, and a wave of interest–described on the program as “a countrywide plague”–was at its height. The program described as well the above-mentioned album, Meitav Amanei Yisrael Sharim Tikun HaKlalai.

324 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

foremost serves as an amulet that grants protection from any potential problems. The marketing of this “universal rectification” is accompanied by a host of stories of miracle precipitated by its presence.36

4 The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah37 The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah links two elements. One is Rabbi Nachman’s request that all of his Hasidim should be 36 For example, in honor of the assassinated general and politician Rahavam Zeevi, his family published a pocketsize edition of the “universal rectification,” with the following declaration on its frontispiece: The universal rectification of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav, may his merit protect us. Possessing supernatural property to save a person from all harmful and destructive events and traffic accidents, illnesses and all types of evil encounters, and a supernatural remedy for getting married, having children and achieving all salvations and emerging from all illnesses, a special talisman that nullifies all opposition and every evil eye and helps a person emerge from every judgment and confusion in life, whatever it may be. And all who have recited these ten chapters have experienced salvations and emerged from all troubles and seen miracles and wonders beyond analysis and without number. Tikun HaKlali (Zeevi) On page 2, the booklet explains that “the very [act] of carrying this (in a pocket or purse) is a wondrous talisman and affords great protection.” The booklet concludes with “a collection of testimonies regarding the wondrous miracles that occurred in the merit of the universal rectification,” describing people who were saved from a bus bombing, from losing their way while hiking in South America, from the terrorist explosion in the Sbarro Restaurant, and so forth, at times quoting from letters written by the participants, all of whom were rescued in the merit of the universal rectification that was on their person–some of them who had not even recited it (ibid., pp. 71–77). A telephone number is provided by means of which it is possible to order an audio CD presenting all of the stories and testimonies in the voices of the people who experienced them. The frontispiece of another edition of the “universal rectification” states: “And it is a talisman that comes from tzaddikim to be recited and also to be kept in one’s pocket, in order to be saved from all terrorists and road accidents, to emerge from all types of troubles. And it is a talisman for plentiful income, for getting married and for all everything in the world, tested and found to be effective! (HaTikun HaKlali [Ha’Eish Sheli]). The recitation of the “universal rectification”–independent of carrying a copy on one’s person–is also commonly described in talismanic terms: “The universal rectification … is very helpful for income and success in all matters in physicality and in spirituality. Fortunate is the person who recites them every day” (Ohr Uman, p. 3 [my pagination]). 37 The most inclusive compilation of Bratslav sources on the topic of Rosh Hashanah is David K.’s Rosh Hashanah Shel Hatzaddik Ha’Emet. Rabbi Nachman of Tcherin’s Yareach Ha’Eitanim is devoted to clarifying the topic of Rosh Hashanah and discussing its representation in all of



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah 

 325

together with him on Rosh Hashanah (“with no one missing”). The second is the rectification that Rabbi Nachman promises to whoever makes pilgrimage to his grave. In Rabbi Nachman’s lifetime, his Hasidim used to come to hear him teach three times a year: Rosh Hashanah, Hanukkah and Shavuot.38 But Rosh Hashanah held a special place in Rabbi Nachman’s worldview, for he saw himself as particularly associated with Rosh Hashanah: “My entire being is only Rosh Hashanah.”39 Rabbi Natan reported that “on Rosh Hashanah, [Rabbi Nachman] brings about matters and rectifications that he cannot achieve during the entire year,”40 and Rabbi Nachman stated that “the Lord (may He be blessed), gave me the gift of knowing what Rosh Hashanah is.”41 Therefore, Rabbi Nachman directed “that [his Hasidim] should all be [together with him] on Rosh Hashanah, with no one missing…. And he directed them to proclaim that all of those who obey him and are close to him should be with him on Rosh Hashanah, with no one missing.”42 The importance that Rabbi Nachman attributed to his actions on Rosh Hashanah extends far beyond rectifying his followers. Rabbi Nachman described these actions as vitally necessary to the entire world: “My Rosh Hashanah is a great innovation…. It goes without saying that all of you certainly depend upon my Rosh Hashanah–but even the entire world depends upon my Rosh Hashanah.”43 Rabbi Nachman’s words regarding his followers’ obligation to gather together with him on Rosh Hashanah did not refer to coming to his gravesite after his death, but to coming to him while he was alive. There is no doubt that he wanted them to come to his grave, and he established a rectification to that end–but he never explicitly linked the pilgrimage to his grave with the time of gathering together on Rosh Hashanah. However, although Rabbi Nachman did not say this, Rabbi Natan, his student, inferred it from his words. Thus, Rabbi Natan wrote, “And at that time we learned of his strong desire that we should always be with him in Uman for Rosh Hashanah after he would pass away, and that there is nothing greater than Rabbi Nachman’s teachings. And there are other anthologies devoted to the topic, among them Y. B. Hershkovitz, Kuntres Likutei Ma’amarim LeRosh Hashanah; Rabbi Shmuel b. Rabbi Avraham Chaim Chechik, Reishit HaShanah; and Y. Tz. Shapira, HaDerekh LaTzaddik. For additional sources, see Assaf, Bibliografyah, pp. 221–231. And see also Wax, “Hanesiyah leRebbe Nachman”; Goshen-Gottstein, “Breslav v’Uman”; Weinstock, “Chidush shelo yei’amen.” 38 Chayei Moharan (“Makom Leidato VIshivato UNesiotav,” 126 [23]), p. 165. 39 Ibid. (“Godel Yikrat Rosh Hashanah Shelo,” 403 [1]), p. 346. 40 Ibid., 406 (4), p. 350. 41 Ibid., 405 (3), p. 347. 42 Ibid., 403 (1), p. 346. 43 Ibid., 405 (3), p. 347.

326 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

that.”44 Rabbi Natan clarifies in his Yemei Moharanat that this inference was not derived from anything explicit that Rabbi Nachman said: I also immediately encouraged myself that we must gather together for Rosh Hashanah in Uman, just as when [Rabbi Nachman] had been alive. And I had a few clear proofs [based on] his holy words. [This is] because the way of [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) was very wondrous and awesome, in particular in regard to his directive to how we should conduct ourselves after his passing. [This is] because very soon before he passed away, we only heard a few words from him (some of them recorded above). And he did not direct us at that time about how to conduct ourselves after his passing.45

Rabbi Natan must depend on inferential proofs since Rabbi Nachman did not explicitly state how his Hasidim should conduct themselves after his passing, and his words at that time were few. The generations of Bratslav Hasidim immediately following Rabbi Nachman’s death were aware that Rabbi Nachman never explicitly stated that after his death they should come to his grave on Rosh Hashanah, and they took care not to attribute an express statement on the topic to Rabbi Nachman, but to describe this as the conclusion reached by his students following his death. Thus, for example, Rabbi Avraham Sternhartz writes: “They all understood after the passing away of our rebbe (may his memory be for a blessing) that the admor (may his memory be for a blessing) implied in his holy words on the eve of his last Rosh Hashanah that they must even now travel for Rosh Hashanah to Uman to his holy gravesite, as they had during his holy lifetime.”46

44 Ibid., 406,(4), p. 348. 45 Yemei Moharanat, Part 1, 67, p. 97. 46 Tovot Zikhronot, pp. 125–126. Similarly, Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz writes in his Tzion HaMetuzyenet, which is dedicated to the subject of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite: On the eve of the last Rosh Hashanah of his holy life, [Rabbi Nachman] spoke a very great deal about this topic: about the great obligation of all those who are close to him to be with him on Rosh Hashanah. And he spoke in a strong voice from the depth of the heart, “What shall I tell you? There is nothing greater than that”–that is to say, than to be with him on Rosh Hashanah. And regarding the implication of his holy words–and in particular, his many words on this topic on the eve of the last Rosh Hashanah soon before he passed away, when he had already told his followers that he will [soon] pass away–his holy students (may their memory be for a blessing) understood that he strongly desired that all those who are close [to him] gather together with him on Rosh Hashanah even after he passes away–i.e., to pray at his holy gravesite on the eve of Rosh Hashanah.… And also on Rosh Hashanah the entire group should pray together with a bond to him (may his memory be for a blessing) and to all of the tzaddikim of the generation.…



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah 

 327

This was how they understood matters following Rabbi Nachman’s death; during his lifetime, however, matters were not so clear, and this view was certainly not stated explicitly. The question of why Rabbi Nachman, who spoke so much about Rosh Hashanah, in the course of which he gave directives, did not bother to point out, if only in a brief sentence, that he wanted people to come to his grave on Rosh Hashanah is not addressed in Bratslav sources. Despite this difficulty, Rabbi Natan succeeded in instituting the view of the importance of gathering together in Uman on Rosh Hashanah, such that a gathering has become obligatory upon every Bratslav Hasid, and Rabbi Nachman’s directive that no one should be missing should be understood as referring as well to the period following his death.47 As stated above, the second factor in the pilgrimage on Rosh Hashanah is the rectification that Rabbi Nachman requested that a person perform at his grave. Rabbi Nachman attributed great importance to pilgrimage to his grave, and said that it may be considered as a universal rectification by means of which a person can rectify all of his sins. Beyond that, Rabbi Nachman made a unique commitment that he had not made in connection with any other, earlier rendition of the universal rectification: [Rabbi Nachman] (may his memory be for a blessing) promised during his lifetime–designating two kosher witnesses to [certify] it48–that after he passes away, when anyone comes to his grave, donates a small coin to charity, and recites those ten chapters of psalms that are listed by us as a rectification for a nocturnal emission (may the Compassionate One protect us), then [Rabbi Nachman] will stretch himself to the length and to the breadth, and he will certainly save that man. And he said that he will bring him out of gehennom by the sidelocks, even if that person has become whatever he has become, even if he transgressed whatever he transgressed, as long as from now on he makes a commitment not to return to his foolishness, heaven forbid.49

Going on pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, the recitation of the ten psalms (Rabbi Nachman’s unique innovation), and giving charity for the elevation of Rabbi Nachman’s soul combine together into a new ritual that expresses the link of the Hasid to his rebbe and the covenant that Rabbi Nachman forges with him. And his holy students, may their memory be for a blessing, “kept and accepted” (Esther 9:27) and agreed to do so every Rosh Hashanah. Tzion HaMetzuyenet, p. 36 47 The question of why Rabbi Nachman viewed Rosh Hashanah as particularly germane to him and why it was important to him that all of his Hasidim gather to be with him at that time is a topic for further discussion. 48 Rabbi Naftali of Nemirov and Rabbi Aharon, the rabbi of Bratslav. 49 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiato VIshivato B’Umin,” 225 [41]), pp. 192–193.

328 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

Rabbi Nachman obligated himself formally in the presence of two witnesses, specially convened for this purpose, to act to the best of his ability to rectify and save every person who performs the three abovementioned elements, as long as that person undertakes not to return to his folly. Rabbi Nachman’s obligation underscores the unique character of the new ritual. In contrast to the rectification for a nocturnal emission, whose power is inherent, the power of the new ritual comes from the personal obligation that Rabbi Nachman accepted upon himself in the presence of two witnesses to rescue from gehennom whoever fulfills his request.

The pilgrimage en masse to Rabbi Nachman’s grave50 Bratslav Hasidim have performed the obligatory pilgrimage with devotion and diligence over the course of the more than 200 years since Rabbi Nachman’s death. Bratslav Hasidism has no rebbe but Rabbi Nachman, and there is no center that unites all Bratslav Hasidim besides the gathering on Rosh Hashanah, which is the only time that all of the dispersed of Bratslav come together to celebrate with their rebbe. The pilgrimage to Uman was never easy. Bratslav Hasidim were the subject of mockery by the local Jewish inhabitants, and at times even of life-threatening brutality. In particular, the Hasidim of Tolna, who also had a study hall and center in Uman, near the study hall of Bratslav Hasidism, were fiercely hostile. Nevertheless, many Bratslav Hasidim continued to gather at the gravesite of their rebbe on Rosh Hashanah every year.51 In 5697 (1937), the gates of the gravesite were closed to the Hasidim, and the communist regime violently dismantled the Bratslav community. Twenty-seven leading Bratslav Hasidim were arrested and sent to Siberia, and their whereabouts were subsequently unknown.52 A few Hasidim secretly made their way to the gravesite at great personal risk, but the large gathering on Rosh Hashanah no longer took place. The Hasidim in the land of Israel gathered in Jerusalem and at Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai’s gravesite in Meron, and the Hasidim in Poland gathered in Lublin (before the Holocaust). Shortly before the beginning of 5750 (1989), permission was granted for pilgrimage to Uman on Rosh Hashanah, and the number of participants in that 50 Regarding the pilgrimages to Uman from the beginning of the twentieth century and onward, see “Uman bayamim haheim,” “Bechiruf nefesh,” Uman Rosh Hashanah, pp. 21–40, 41–56; Uman, Kakh Nifratzah HaDerekh. 51 See Assaf, “Adayin lo nishkat hariv.” 52 See Friedman, Ish Chasidekhah, p. 177.



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah 

 329

gathering has steadily grown. In recent years, an aerial caravan leaves the land of Israel on the eve of every Rosh Hashanah, airplanes filled with thousands of Jews–Hasidim and non-Hasidim, Sefardim and Ashkenazim,53 religious and secular–on pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite to celebrate Rosh Hashanah with him. Most of these pilgrims come from Israel, but groups travel as well from the United States, Canada and France.54 The broad range of those who come, which is expressed in their clothing and manner of speech, is clearly represented on the streets of Uman on Rosh Hashanah. Besides the principal prayer groups that meet in the New Kloyz (‘Synagogue’)–an Ashkenazi group and a Sefardi group, in which thousands of Hasidim participate–there are many other groups: those of Eastern communities, two in Yemenite style, a gathering of Chabad Hasidim and one of Satmar Hasidim, and so forth. Young secular Jews participate alongside famous rabbis as well as celebrities from the fields of entertainment and politics. The pilgrimage to Uman is widely covered by the media and has been recorded in various documentary films, such as Yippee by Hollywood director, Paul Mazursky, who joined the travelers to Uman in 5760.55

53 The approbation written by the dean of Yeshiva Kisei Rachamim, Rabbi Meir Mazuz, for Rosh Hashanah Shel Tzaddik Ha’Emet–a book that urges the importance of traveling to Uman on Rosh Hashanah–is instructive: I have seen a large part of this book, composed by Rabbi David Kapshian (may he live a long and good life) regarding the great importance of traveling to the grave of the holy tzaddik, Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing) on Rosh Hashanah, in which he has anthologized material from various books and authors. The truth is that we never had this custom. To the contrary, all members of the family would strive to celebrate the day of Rosh Hashanah together (as well as Rosh Chodesh Nissan, which is the new year of kings and holidays, as is known). But in recent times, many Sephardim travel to Uman for Rosh Hashanah, and they tell of the miracles and wonders that they have experienced, both materially and spiritually, “the handiwork of a craftsman” (Song of Songs 7:2). [The Hebrew for ‘craftsman,’ aman, puns with ‘Uman.’] And it seems to me that if someone properly supervises the boys and girls in the holiday prayers and shofar blowing, it is a mitzvah to travel at least once in one’s lifetime in order to be at the gravesite of the holy one of Israel (may the memory of a tzaddik be for a blessing). And may we attain the complete redemption, quickly, in our days, amen. The date of this approbation is 23 Tammuz 5758. See Rosh Hashanah Shel Tzaddik Ha’Emet, p. 11 (my pagination). 54 Based on various estimates in written and electronic reportage, in recent years about 30,000 people have been coming to Uman every Rosh Hashanah. 55 See above, note 4. Other examples are Doron Tsabari’s film, HaMasa L’Uman (Channel 2, 9 November 1997), and Noam Demsky’s film, Uman: Masa Rosh Hashanah 5758 (Channel 2, 24 September 1998).

330 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

Rabbi Nachman’s promise to aid those who come to his grave is described in contemporary Bratslav writings and advertisements as a factor of central importance to making pilgrimage to Uman on Rosh Hashanah. And the most significant activity there is the recitation of the ten psalms. Some people recite it once, and others multiple times. This is accompanied by giving charity for the elevation of Rabbi Nachman’s soul, to which end charity collection boxes are everywhere to be found.

From personal rectification to a “worldwide universal rectification” The ritual built upon the rectification for a nocturnal emission and upon the desire to repent and receive the assistance of Rabbi Nachman, who will pull a person out of gehennom, is at the core a personal, almost intimate, ritual between the Hasid and his God, between the Hasid and his rebbe. But in recent years a substantial innovation has occurred, so that the recitation of psalms performed as part of the universal rectification has become a ritual performed en masse. On the eve of Rosh Hashanah, thousands of Hasidim gather near Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite and recite the psalms in unison, led by a prayer leader. This ceremony is referred to as the “worldwide universal rectification,” the number of whose participants grows year by year. This en masse recitation is broadcast live by satellite and on the internet across the globe. Various Bratslav centers in Israel feature a live feed on large screens in order to allow everyone who was unable to come to Uman–including women (who are not supposed to come to Uman on Rosh Hashanah56)–to be a part of the “worldwide universal rectification” (see photograph 9 in Appendix 3 of posters advertising the broadcast). The “worldwide universal rectification” did not begin as an organized initiative of Bratslav rabbis or of a committee in charge of events but as a grassroots initiative. In 5763 or 5764, a young man launched a participatory recitation of the psalms. He distributed leaflets that called upon people to come to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite at mid-day and recite the psalms in unison. The response was

56 Generally speaking, only males come to Uman on Rosh Hashanah. That is keeping with the ruling of the majority of Bratslav leaders. Nevertheless, in recent years there have been exceptions, and these have been growing more numerous. Rabbi Eliezer Schick’s contingent includes a women’s section. He explains that it is preferable that men arrive with their wives. Nevertheless, the population is overwhelmingly male. Regarding the male experience and brotherhood in Uman, see Goshen-Gottstein, “Bratslav v’Uman,” in the section entitled, “Uman Rosh Hashanah–olam hagevarim.”



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah 

 331

enthusiastic, and the next year more people joined the event. Loudspeakers were utilized, and information in advance of the event was distributed in a more organized and widespread fashion. In the third year, an important Bratslav donor, Rabbi Israel Zinger, commenced the broadcast of the “worldwide universal rectification” by satellite and internet. Since then, this has become an organized event that most of those who come to Uman participate in.57 And it allows those who did not come to Uman to recite the psalms together with those there and in this way to participate in the pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave. The “worldwide universal rectification” performed near Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite is particularly powerful not only because of the site where it is recited, which the Hasidim have reached after overcoming many difficulties–financial, social and familial–and not only because of the impressive mass presence of people, but also because of the critical nature of the season. Rosh Hashanah is the day of judgment in which “He judges all creatures of all worlds: who will live and who will die, who will be brought low and who will be elevated” (prayerbook). Repentance is the central theme of the Ten Days of Penitence, which begin on Rosh Hashanah, and the rectification is a vital and necessary part of those days. What is at stake is not a mitzvah or a custom, but the question of “who will live and who will die.” The character of the day immeasurably enhances the meaning and importance of the universal rectification. Rabbi Nachman’s promise to a person who goes on pilgrimage to his grave and performs the rectification “that he will bring him out of gehennom by the sidelocks, even if that person has become whatever he has become, even if he transgressed whatever he transgressed, as long as from now he makes a commitment not to return to his foolishness, heaven forbid,”58 has become–in this circumstance on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, the Day of Judgment–filled with tre-

57 The number of participants in the “worldwide universal rectification” rose markedly between my first trip to Uman on Rosh Hashanah 5766, and my subsequent trips in 5770 and 5771. My impression is that a large part of the people there believed that the en masse recitation of the “worldwide universal rectification” is an old, traditional element of the pilgrimage to Uman. The various newspaper articles described this as a principal event. Thus, for example, Shai Doron wrote: “The central event of the Uman carnival is the ‘universal rectification’ that takes place at 12 o’clock noon exactly, on the eve of Rosh Hashanah … when the atmosphere of holiness spreads through the air. I found myself shedding tears like a small boy at the sight of 20,000 Jews crying out the chapters of psalms together … Immediately afterwards a mass Hasidic dance began, assisted by the public address system of Uman. Thousands of people of all stripes of Israeli society held hands and danced with energy that would not shame Ha’Oman 17 [a Tel Aviv bar]–pardon me, Uman on Rosh Hashanah” (Shai Doron, “Ma’aseh Uman: lihiyot etzlo beRosh Hashanah”: ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3308397,00.html, published 9 September, 2006. 58 Chayei Moharan (“Nesiato VIshivato B’Umin,” 225 [41]), pp. 192–193.

332 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

mendous meaning that enhances the person’s preparedness to commit himself not to return to his foolishness but to transform his life. Rabbi Nachman’s commitment powerfully binds the person with Rabbi Nachman, the great defender whose aid the pilgrim has acquired at the time of his recitation of the ten psalms. Rabbi Nachman obligates himself to defend the pilgrim who performs this rectification, making a unique promise that no other tzaddik has ever made: that he will concern himself personally to rescue him from gehennom and rectify his blemishes and transgressions. Such a promise can connect a Hasid to his rebbe with cords of love, gratitude and awe. This mass event, involving tens of thousands of participants and broadcast throughout the world, intensifies the atmosphere in Uman. This may be expressed by the thought that if on Rosh Hashanah God is crowned King of the world and a person accepts upon himself the yoke of God’s sovereignty, on the eve of Rosh Hashanah, during the recitation of the “worldwide universal rectification,” Rabbi Nachman is crowned the tzaddik of generations as people accept his authority, refuge and protection. Uman has become the center stage of all Rosh Hashanah activities. The largest and most influential Rosh Hashanah ceremony in the world takes place in Uman. The Hasidim feel that the oft-repeated statement in the name of Rabbi Natan, “[On Rosh Hashanah,] everyone cries out ‘the King’, but the coronation takes place in Uman,”59 has in recent years been to some degree realized, so that it is reasonable to say that Rabbi Nachman is crowned as tzaddik of the world. Even if the atmosphere in Uman on Rosh Hashanah is accompanied by joy and song, it is tense. Many heartfelt conversations take place. At bookstands, in the streets, in food tents, in shared living quarters and in the mikveh shower areas, the atmosphere is of closeness and warmth. And in these conversations, one can hear that for many, Uman is a core event, a critical turning point in their lives. A few have experienced this in the past, on a previous Rosh Hashanah in Uman, and a few hope that they will experience this now–indeed, it is precisely for the sake of such a powerful experience that they underwent the hardship of coming. Preceding Rosh Hashanah, joy prevails around the gravesite, and the atmosphere is festive. This continues until the holiday begins. At that time, quiet replaces the commotion and loud music, and silence and awe replace the merri59 Moharanat [Rabbi Natan] once lavishly described the greatness of the gathering of Bratslav Hasidim on Rosh Hashanah in Uman. He said, “[On Rosh Hashanah], everyone cries out ‘the King’, but the coronation takes place in Uman. Di gantze velt shreit HaMelekh, ober di kreinitze iz in Uman.” Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volume 3, 168, p. 73; and quoted as well in the name of Bratslav Hasidim–see Tzion HaMetzuyenet, p. 8



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah 

 333

ment. The joy takes on a new hue. On the eve of the holiday, people in the street even howl in strong, raw outcries, which here are acceptable, almost natural– cries of pain, cries whose contents are obscure but whose power is clear. These indicate that something crucial is happening to them, something is taking them out of their limitations as well as their tranquility.60 To illustrate this, I will describe an occurrence that took place during Tashlikh in Uman on Rosh Hashanah 5766, a part of which I witnessed, which helped me understand this aspect of the Hasidic gathering in Uman.

Tashlikh in Uman on Rosh Hashanah Tashlikh is a Rosh Hashanah custom in which a person expresses the idea that he is throwing away his sins by symbolically shaking them out of his pockets and casting them into a body of water. In Uman, Tashlikh is performed en masse. Very near the New Kloyz (‘Synagogue’), which hosts the principal prayer group, stands a medium-sized marsh, around which Tashlikh takes place. The sight is spectacular. Various groups make their way down to the marsh, singing and dancing, at times assembled about one rabbi or another. The thousands who come completely surround the marsh. Everyone is dressed in holiday clothing–one in a shtreimel and another in a Bratslav cotton kipah; one in a kittel and another in an Indian-style white shirt. Some go in a silk robes, white or striped in glittering colors. Among them, that year, stood a group of young men whose clothing and hairstyle made it clear that they were not Hasidim. One of them carried another youth, who was clutching something, on his shoulders. They approached the marsh and the youth threw whatever was in his hand into the water. As he did so, he began to wail. He didn’t say anything, he didn’t sing–he just wailed. Suddenly his friends–and then, like an echo, many others as well–also began to wail. When I asked what this meant, I was told that he had been entrusted with the body jewelry of his friends, who were standing around him. They had decided to get rid of the jewelry and everything that it represented for them, and to throw it into the marsh. This young man was given the honor of casting away everyone else’s body jewelry besides his own because he was making the greatest sacrifice, since his 60 A critical description of the unrepressed atmosphere in which people have the custom “of crying out simply because ‘I feel like it’” is found in Rabbi Natan Anshin’s essay, “Im lo rabbeinu, rachat aleinu.”

334 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

had a precious gem set in it. They were crying out, they explained to me, because doing this was so painful.61 The Tashlikh ceremony suddenly acquired a new, fresh meaning. Afterwards, I learned that for some people casting away body jewelry had become the most decisive moment of their pilgrimage to Uman.62 This casting away of body jewelry has become an annual ritual involving new participants. This act, even though it is only symbolic, demonstrates the charged atmosphere in Uman. Rosh Hashanah in Uman is not a homey bourgeois holiday that strengthens the connection between tradition and family; on Rosh Hashanah in Uman, people transform their lives.

Uman as a turning point in the lives of those who come on pilgrimage In conversations on the streets of Uman and adjacent to the gravesite, I heard many stories from people for whom the journey to Uman constituted a turning point in their lives. In Uman the decision not to return to their foolishness ripened in their hearts. It appears that the place, the resolution and the context of the holiday connected these people tightly to Rabbi Nachman with a lifelong bond. Some tell that after this first visit they experienced an intense year of transformation that was never repeated, but every year when they return to spend Rosh Hashanah with Rabbi Nachman in Uman, its memory is renewed.63 That initial

61 Anshin’s essay mentioned in the previous footnote describes the same event. Anshin writes that the jewelry that the young man threw away was worth $1500, and that as he threw it away he promised Rabbi Nachman “that he will never return to the culture of earrings, no matter what.” Anshin also describes “these types that overflowed the banks of the river and cried out in unison, Oy! Oy!” (ibid.). Another description of “young people steeling themselves to throw their earrings into the river to cheers” is to be found in Doron’s article, “Ma’aseh Uman.” 62 The important role that Tashlikh plays in the pilgrimage to Uman is expressed in the film Yippee by Hollywood director, Paul Mazursky. Mazursky speaks and jokes throughout the entire film except for one part in which he only makes a few introductory remarks: the scene of Tashlikh. Before it begins, Mazursky and a few interviewees describe Tashlikh as a peak moment that is difficult to describe–a person must be there or at least see its documentation to sense its power. Tashlikh is the high point of the film; afterwards, it describes the return home. Others too describe Tashlikh as “the meaningful event that concludes Rosh Hashanah in Uman.” See Doron, “Ma’aseh Uman.” 63 Many of these stories are documented in booklets that come out every year before the trip to Uman. An example is a compilation called Uman Rosh Hashanah: Kedushat HaMakom, Sichot, Ma’amarim, Nesiot B’Chiruf Nefesh, Reshamim, Niflaot VeSipurei Mofet.



The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave in Uman on Rosh Hashanah 

 335

year was the first time that they experienced a strong connection to the worlds of Hasidism and of mysticism and kabbalah. The longer one stays in Uman, the clearer it grows that many of those who appear as born-and-bred Hasidim started out from realms very far removed from the world of Hasidism, and at times far from the world of Judaism. This expresses itself strikingly in the mikveh. Many of the Hasidim are revealed to be sporting tattoos, some of them quite fresh, something forbidden by the Torah. And removing a tattoo may also be problematical, because at least some ways of removing a tattoo are forbidden (because they too constitute making a tattoo). There it is clear that even those who appear as dyed-in-the-wool Hasidim had to travel a long distance before shaping their spiritual and religious world in the spirit of Hasidism. It appears that the great majority of contemporary Bratslav Hasidim and those who make the pilgrimage to Uman are new penitents, whose path to self-transformation was significantly shaped by the influence of Rabbi Nachman.64 One gets the sense that many people feel that sexuality is the hardest area in their lives to rectify. Non-halachic sexual desire is not like Sabbath desecration and eating unkosher food: it oppresses and pursues a person even after he has decided to change his life. The lacerations that a person may have suffered accompany him into the new framework of holy and pure relationships that he is attempting to build, and cast a dark shadow across it. The great importance attributed to sexual purity in the Jewish world–in particular, in kabbalah and Hasidism–intensifies this problem. And here Rabbi Nachman’s promise (made in the presence of two witnesses) that with the help of his rectifications a person can completely rectify the erotic aspect of his life does much to assist a person who has chosen to change his life and undergo a radical change of values in regard to sexual conduct. Rabbi Nachman’s statement that if a person succeeds in rectifying “the universal desire” of sexuality, he has passed the most significant stumbling block on the way to repentance and rectification, is an existential reality for many of his new Hasidim. The rectification of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave, in which a person obligates himself not to return to his folly and Rabbi Nachman promises that he will personally rescue him from gehennom, forges a strong covenant between the Hasid and the rebbe. Rabbi Nachman is prepared not only to obligate himself to help this person attain elevated goals and not only to help enrich his religious experience, but also to take responsibility for dealing with the still-troubling

64 Others agree with this evaluation. See Gissin, “Mavo,” p.  17; Goshen-Gottstein, “Breslav v’Uman,” next to notes 6, 7.

336 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

stains of his past. As Rabbi Nachman testified about himself, “I am a river that purifies from all stains.”65 In Uman, people immerse themselves in that river. A person’s sense that he can attain purity gives him the confidence that he can step toward a more rectified and spiritual future without dragging along the sins of his past like a millstone around his neck. The pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite on Rosh Hashanah offers the pilgrim not only time for thoughts of repentance and personal accounting, but it provides rectifications and rituals with clear instructions as to what to recite and do. Pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave is usually accompanied by many obstacles. There are financial challenges, family difficulties, and more. The journey to Uman and the stay there are usually marked by physical discomfort and the need to do without many of the amenities that one is accustomed to.66 All of this is viewed as part of the journey of apprenticeship. The pilgrim believes that if he passes these tests and accepts the necessary obligations, he will be accepted into the holy gathering of the Hasidim of Rabbi Nachman, and that from now on Rabbi Nachman will undertake to act on his behalf with all his might, even if Rabbi Nachman must pull him out of gehennom by his sidelocks.67

65 Chayei Moharan (“Ma’alat HaMitkarvim Eilav,” 332 [42]), p. 204. 66 In his essay, “Breslav v’Uman,” Alon Goshen-Gottstein explains at length “the journey and the sacrifice” required of those who come to Uman. The stay in Uman is far from satisfying the most basic conditions that the travelers are accustomed to, such as running bathroom water, a mattress and privacy. Rabbi Nachman himself spoke of the sacrifices (whether physical or spiritual) intrinsic in coming to him on Rosh Hashanah: “Whether you eat or don’t eat, whether you sleep or don’t sleep, whether you pray or don’t pray–as long as you are with me on Rosh Hashanah, however it may be” (Chayei Moharan [“Godel Yikrat Rosh Hashanah Shelo,” 404 (2)], p. 346). 67 Rabbi Natan describes a Hasid’s faith that Rabbi Nachman will rescue him from gehennom in the following words: “You will not abandon my spirit to Sheol, for You will not allow Your pious one to see the Pit” (Psalms 16:10). The phrase, “Your pious one,” refers to the rebbe, the true tzaddik, who engages in a person’s rectification. In [that rebbe’s] merit and power, I trust that “You will not abandon my soul to Sheol,” for You will not allow Your “pious one,” who is the rebbe, the true tzaddik, “to see the Pit” … [This is] because if, heaven forbid, I will be in Sheol and the Pit, certainly the tzaddik, the true rebbe, will look there at every moment with great suffering in order to raise me out of there, because he constantly engages in my rectification. And therefore, in his merit and power I trust that You will not abandon my spirit to Sheol, and that is so that You will not allow Your pious one, who is the true tzaddik, to see the Pit (and as [mentioned] above). Likutei Halakhot, Volume 1 (“Orach Chaim: Hilkhot Hashkamat HaBoker,” 4:4), pp. 9–10



The rectification and messianism 

 337

A common saying among these pilgrims is that Rabbi Nachman has already kept his promise to them. I heard more than one say that he doesn’t know what will happen to him in the world-to-come but in this world Rabbi Nachman has already pulled him out of gehennom. A person who was helped by Rabbi Nachman at a crucial moment in his life and who underwent a transformation that in his estimation brought him out of the gehennom in which he was immersed feels connected with and obligated to Rabbi Nachman for the rest of his life.

5 The rectification and messianism The recitation of the ten psalms that were first established as a rectification for a nocturnal emission, a rectification that at its core is individual and personal, is now connected to the “worldwide universal rectification” performed en masse at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite. The individual’s rectification and personal redemption from his blemishes is now just a detail in the “worldwide universal rectification.” A person’s feeling of relief and redemption as he sets down his heavy sins and emerges from his personal existential gehennom blends with the feeling of solemn intensity of a community of tens of thousands accepting in unison the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, yearning for the day when “the Lord will be one and His name will be one” (Zechariah 14:9). This impressive rectification occurs in the courtyard of Rabbi Nachman, 200 years after his death. In this context, the feeling of personal and communal renewal is identified absolutely with the Bratslav renaissance and the messianic spirit, as was discussed at length at the beginning of the chapter. This deeply stirring event, the feeling of catharsis and freedom of those who have attained rectification, the sense of personal redemption that many of them experience, the awareness that tens of thousands of other Jews who have been in Uman on Rosh Hashanah have undergone a similar spiritual experience, the variety of people in Uman that clearly represents not only a sector but the entirety of the Jewish people, arouse and strengthen the feeling amidst the Hasidim, new and old, that something great is occurring, that Rabbi Nachman is at last taking his proper place and becoming a tzaddik for the generations, that just as they tangibly see his power to redeem and rectify the souls of all who come to him, there is no doubt that he has the power to pave a way for the messiah and “rectify the world in the kingdom of the Almighty” (prayerbook). The awareness of Bratslav’s new strength and of the transformation of Rabbi Nachman’s status in recent decades combines with the intensity of the Rosh Hashanah experience– and these two augment each other.

338 

  Two Hundred Years Later – from Individual to Universal Rectification

The pilgrimage on Rosh Hashanah is not only a peak event and decisive personal moment for many of those who come, but also a test of Bratslav Hasidism as a movement, and in a sense of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav himself and his presumption to be a tzaddik for the generations. There is no doubt that the present era is marked by the greatest flowering that Bratslav Hasidism has ever attained. The question that naturally arises is whether it has reached its apex, following which it will experience stabilization or descent, or whether Bratslav Hasidism’s brightest future still lies ahead. In the coming year, will even more pilgrims come to Uman on Rosh Hashanah, or has Bratslav Hasidism exhausted the full potential of its expansion, so that the number of pilgrims will remain steady or even decline? It is hard to identify any signs indicating that the latter is the case. To the contrary, the impression is that the number of Bratslav Hasidism–whether identified as such or not–is still growing, and that this process is growing stronger and will lead Bratslav Hasidism–and in particular, Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav–to function as a principal factor in the spiritual Jewish life of our era. Only time will tell.

Afterword This book has provided a glimpse into Rabbi Nachman’s personal mystical world. Part One: Revelation examined three revelatory episodes that Rabbi Nachman experienced, which presumably helped shape his mystical perspective and self-concept as a tzaddik for all generations. (It should be noted that records of other such episodes not discussed in this book are also extant.) Of supreme importance is the esoteric tale, “The Story of the Bread,” which reveals Rabbi Nachman as someone who received the Torah directly and personally from God, and who has no need for the intermediaries of books and people. Rabbi Nachman attained the Torah in toto, including all of its future developments. Rabbi Nachman saw himself as a tzaddik on the level of Moses receiving the Torah directly from God. And that apparently served as a foundation of his self-image as a tzaddik on the level of Moses-Messiah. Moses as teacher received and transmitted the Torah, and as Moses-Messiah he was the first redeemer (who brought the nation of Israel out of the oppression of Egypt) and he will be the final, future redeemer. Thus, Rabbi Nachman, who is on the level of Moses who received the Torah, is as well on the level of Moses-Messiah, the first and final redeemer. It is possible that Rabbi Nachman’s experience of the test of combining all of the letters of the Torah was not only an initiation ceremony that tried his spiritual and mystical abilities and served as an introductory test to the world of the mystics, but that it was also a test that will be administered to the future messiah. Rabbi Nachman’s messianic self-consciousness did not develop as a response to any particular historical occurrence, but grew out of his own personal spiritual and mystical biography. His mystical consciousness, it may be said, preceded his messianic consciousness. His view of himself as possessing an extraordinary spiritual makeup led to his messianic self-image. Similarly, the crisis in Rabbi Nachman’s messianic self-consciousness and the dissolution of Bratslav Hasidism’s acute messianic fervor in the summer of 5566 resulted not from historical and public imperatives but from extremities in Rabbi Nachman’s personal world, such as the death of his son Shlomo Ephraim and the intensification of the dispute against him.1 There is a parallel between the development of Rabbi Nachman’s messianic self-consciousness, rooted in his mystical experiences, and his description of the messiah and the messianic process in Megillat Setarim and, more broadly, in the totality of his thought. In these sources, Rabbi Nachman described the messiah’s 1 See Mark, The Scroll of Secrets, pp. 134–149.

340 

 Afterword

principal field of activity not as taking place on the battlefield but as spiritual enterprise abetted by prayer, wisdom and melody, accompanied by longing and yearning, and involving rectifications of prayer and religion. Although the messianic process described in Megillat Setarim includes political work with kings and emperors, the messiah is not described as a king utilizing political and military power but as a charismatic figure, a world tzaddik who engages in hitbodedut and prayer and derives his influence from his spiritual activity and from the fact that he inspires yearning in the hearts of all who come in contact with him. The political processes are not the source of his ability to change and rectify the world but a side-effect of his ability as tzaddik. Thus, the secret of the might of the messianic figure is the highly charged spiritual world from which he is constructed. The test of letter combinations was a test of initiation and entry into the mystical world, and possibly exemplified the character of Rabbi Nachman’s early mystical experiences as a whole. In the course of this experience, Rabbi Nachman felts like a child among adults or like a student who is being tested. But at the end of the process and experience, he passed the test and in so doing received approval to act as a mystic who knows all of the combinations of the letters of the Torah. This book examined, in addition to the powerful experience documented in “The Story of the Bread,” experiences possessing a less extreme, pronounced and absolute mystical character. One such is the vision of “The Guest Who Came In.” This vision was experienced or related in 5569, and as such is related to mystical experiences of Rabbi Nachman’s later years. Nevertheless, it possesses a hesitant character. The protagonist experiences flight in the air and encounters a kabbalistic world that he does not understand except for the basic knowledge that his guide “is certainly from a good world.” This vision shows that the lines of development in Rabbi Nachman’s mystical world proceeded not only from hesitation to decisiveness, but at times in the opposite direction, leading to “the ultimate knowledge is that we do not know” and to states of consciousness that express the mystic’s loss of self-confidence. Part Two: Rectifications examined the fact that in Rabbi Nachman’s spiritual world not only mystical revelations and experiences existed but also coarse erotic tests, which occurred while he was still tender in years. In some of these, Rabbi Nachman was confronted with temptation against his will, but he rejoiced in these challenges and even prayed that they be repeated. Although he could have fled, Rabbi Nachman testified, he did not do so, since “he desired tests.” In Rabbi Nachman’s eyes, a test is not merely a necessity–it is a stage that a person must undergo before he can attain holiness and the revelation of the Torah. Tests are the husk that precedes the fruit of holiness and revelation. The

Afterword 

 341

only way to attain the fruit is first to contend with the husk. His pathway led through the husk of tests as a necessary stage before reaching the goal of the revelation of the Torah–a revelation that he believed he had attained in the fullest and highest possible way. Withstanding erotic enticement served as an element in Rabbi Nachman’s self-image as a tzaddik on the level of Joseph, who represents the trait of yesod and is obligated to engage in the rectification of the covenant. Rabbi Nachman withstood the test, just as Joseph had in his time. As a result of fully guarding the purity of the covenant, he attained revelation and Torah; consequently, he saw himself as worthy of founding and revealing the rectifications of the covenant in a full and perfect way that had no precedent in all creation. The precise analysis in Part Two of the details of the rectifications that Rabbi Nachman established and of their roots–in particular, in the zoharic literature and the kabbalah of the Ari–revealed that they are based upon the kabbalistic symbology connected with Joseph’s test, accompanied by the imagery of war and arrows. Even though Joseph did not succumb to Potiphar’s wife, according to the midrash and the kabbalistic literature ten drops of seed emerged from his fingers, which brought about a blemish for generations to come. These drops of seed were reincarnated into the ten sages killed by the Roman government, whose deaths came to grant atonement for this blemish and rectify it. The contexture of Rabbi Nachman’s rectifications, their related teachings, and Rabbi Nachman’s “Story of the Armor” and “Story of the Sixth Beggar,” deepen and solidify the link between the rectifications and this kabbalistic symbology. From this link, the present analysis deduced that not only do the rectifications attend to the personal blemishes of souls but the rectifications combine to rectify the Shekhinah–a rectification that is a condition for–and one of the purposes of–redemption. This background to understanding the rectifications explained the importance that Rabbi Nachman attributed to the Uman cemetery, in which many Jews who had been killed in sanctification of God’s name were buried. Rabbi Nachman’s yearning to die in sanctification of God’s name might now be understood in the light of his self-concept as a tzaddik who has the mission of completely rectifying the blemish of the covenant, a blemish that was caused by Joseph’s ten drops, and which only such a death can rectify. The ten sages killed by the Roman government began this process, but they did not complete it, and Rabbi Nachman saw himself as being obligated to do so. He felt that tens of thousands of souls who had died in sanctification of God’s name and who did not complete their rectification awaited his arrival and his death, for only that could lead to their rectification and elevation. Rabbi Nachman felt that even in the course of his lifetime he was sacrificing his life in sanctification of God’s name, and he saw in his acceptance of his immi-

342 

 Afterword

nent death a preparedness to give up his life in such sanctification. Therefore, with his death Rabbi Nachman would join the martyrs of Uman, and in so doing he would be able to assist in their rectification and elevation. For the follower of Rabbi Nachman, the Uman cemetery, which represents those killed in sanctification of God’s name, is the most fitting place to perform the rectification of pilgrimage to his grave, a visit that can serve as a universal rectification that includes the rectification of the covenant. Here the pilgrim recites the ten chapters of psalms, which correspond to the ten types of pulse, the ten types of melody and joy that alone can rectify the fatal wound of the ten types of arrows brought into being by the blemishes visited upon the covenant. These arrows wounded the Shekhinah in a way that no physician and sage could heal until the arrival of the great sage and physician–Rabbi Nachman–who knows the ten types of melody and who would give up his life in sanctification of God’s name. Only he can heal the Shekhinah of the fatal wounds caused by the poisoned arrows. Rabbi Nachman is thus viewed as a mythological figure superior to Joseph the tzaddik. He has the mission of rectifying the cosmic blemishes that Joseph imposed upon the Shekhinah. As Messiah son of Joseph, Rabbi Nachman must sacrifice his life for the sake of the rectification of the blemishes of the Shekhinah–a universal rectification that will pave the way for Messiah son of David, and for the complete redemption that will be ushered in under his sovereignty. Rabbi Nachman’s death has not put an end to the story of the rectifications. They have become foundational elements in the lives of Bratslav Hasidim, and over the years have expanded in various directions. The recitation of the ten chapters of psalms has been seen as an independent unit that itself comprises the universal rectification, with which a person can rectify all of his sins and blemishes. The occasions during which to recite the ten chapters of psalms have expanded over the years, and it appears that this process has not yet reached an end. The rectification of pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s grave has become the most prominent Rosh Hashanah gathering in the entire Jewish world, one in which tens of thousands of Jews come to celebrate Rabbi Nachman’s holiday together with him, an event during which the old rectifications are renewed and new customs are founded, which become part of the great universal rectification at Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite. The intensity of the rectification creates waves of Jewish repentance and renewal, and these strengthen the faith that it is indeed possible to rectify. The feeling in the hearts of many pilgrims is that just as tens of thousand have already come to Uman and immersed themselves in “the river that purifies of all stains,” in “the stream flowing from the source of wisdom,” and repented and felt renewed, so is there a chance of global repentance and of a worldwide universal rectification that will raise the Shekhinah from the dust and

Afterword 

 343

induce the revelation of the light of the messiah–which is, according to Bratslav faith, associated with the revelation of the light of Rabbi Nachman.

 Appendix

Appendix One “The Story of Rabbi Perachia”: Additional Links between the Zoharic Literature and “The Guest Who Came In” The influence of the Zohar on “The Guest Who Came In” may be recognized not only in shared perspectives and concepts1 but also in a cluster of shared narrative elements–in particular, between “The Guest Who Came In” and the Zohar’s “Story of Rabbi Perachia.”2 This zoharic story, which (like Rabbi Nachman’s tale) describes yearning for the supernal world, is filled with various details and lessons, but I will here confine myself to those elements of narrative structure and details that bear comparison with Rabbi Nachman’s story. “The Story of Rabbi Perachia” is prefaced by a passage praising those who strive to know the world of souls, and the statement that Rabbi Perachia was one of these. One day, tells the Zohar, Rabbi Perachia entered a field, where he came upon the corpse of a Torah scholar, and buried it. When the soul of this Torah scholar rose to heaven, it was informed that it would not be allowed to enter the realm appropriate for it until it would return the favor to Rabbi Perachia. Some time afterwards, as Rabbi Perachia was sitting at the gate of Lod, dejected because he was impoverished, a stranger came up to him and asked him to accompany him on the road, where they would discuss Torah. In exchange

1 These perspectives and concepts are of course found among post-Zohar kabbalists. For example, Rabbi Yeshayahu Horowitz, author of Shenei Luchot HaBrit, writes: Know that there is a lower Garden of Eden and an upper Garden of Eden. The upper Garden of Eden is the camp of the Shekhinah, and the lower Garden of Eden is equivalent to the Levite camp.  If a person has sinned and worn the unclean spirit so that he has been ejected even from the lower Garden of Eden, Hashem, Who desires his well-being, gave us His Torah to perform the commandments. And when we perform them, we attain an inner garment–i.e., a cloak of light…. And there are different levels of garments–i.e., a garment is made for the lower Garden of Eden when a person performs the commandments in a physical, active way, and another, more interior garment is woven from a person’s knowledge of the secrets. And in that [latter] garment, a person comes to the King in the upper Garden of Eden. Shenei Luchot HaBrit (“Bamidbar-Devorim: Parshat Ki Teitzei, Torah Ohr”), p. 88b Regarding the various factors that result in different garments, see also Scholem, “Levush haneshamot,” p. 298. 2 Zohar Chadash, Part 2 (“Midrash Ruth”), pp. 274–283.

348 

 Appendix One

for this, the stranger would give Rabbi Perachia vessels of silver. Rabbi Perachia agreed and accompanied the man. On the way, the stranger told Rabbi Perachia that in the supernal, non-physical world, the righteous strive to know the precious character of God by means of wearing a garment appropriate for that world. The two men came to a cave in a field. When they descended into the cave, they saw an orchard in which grew trees unlike any on earth, one of which was different than all the others. A voice proclaimed, “Come, let us bow and prostrate; let us kneel before the Lord our Maker” (Psalms 95:6). In astonishment, Rabbi Perachia asked, “What is this?” The other man replied, “Silence!” As they continued, they came to a closed gate and the man called out, “Open for me the gates of righteousness!” (Psalms 118:19). But the gatekeepers first asked, referring to Rabbi Perachia, “Who allowed this creature born of woman to enter?” The man answered, “That is Rabbi Perachia.” They opened the gate and said, “Strip him (of the garments of the body), for no one here may rise in a body of the earthly realm.” Immediately, he was stripped and clothed in garments of the nature of the inner garden.3 Rabbi Perachia rose and saw a firmament composed of all of the colors in the world, inset with windows. And Rabbi Perachia tells: “As I looked at a window, the [angel] in charge, named Aniel, approached … He told me, ‘Stand where you are and look through this window. Only those who strive to recite the Shema properly may rise there and look through it.”4 Thus far the narrative. This “Story of Rabbi Perachia” and “The Story of the Guest Who Came In” have many elements in common. In each, the protagonist yearns for a world of holiness. A stranger whose identity is unknown enters into the protagonist’s life. That stranger engages in a conversation on Torah and gains the protagonist’s trust and approval. In the course of the story, it grows clear that the stranger is not human, and he takes the protagonist on a marvelous journey to the upper world. During that journey, the protagonist encounters unique trees that have no like in this world. So that he may rise to the upper world, the protagonist is given a spiritual garment associated with the lower Garden of Eden. When the protagonist asks the meaning of what he sees, the authoritative stranger chooses not to reply (“Silence!” “I have no time”). 3 See Cohen-Alloro, Sod HaMalbush, p. 52. 4 Zohar Chadash, Part 2 (“Midrash Ruth”), p. 278 (my translation [Zvi Mark]).



“The Story of Rabbi Perachia” 

 349

In both stories, the protagonist looks through a window5 and sees a messenger from the upper world who explains what is happening.6 In “The Guest Who Came In,” the protagonist ‘flies’ (poreach), and in the zoharic story, the protagonist is called Rabbi Perachia.7 It is possible that Rabbi Nachman saw in the name of the zoharic protagonist a symbolic expression of the process described in his story: a flight of the soul.8 It seems implausible that such an aggregation of shared elements is coincidental. It is more reasonable to suppose that Rabbi Nachman incorporated these elements of “The Story of Rabbi Perachia” into his own tale, whether consciously or unconsciously. However, there is a marked contrast between the two tales. As argued earlier, Rabbi Nachman’s Hasidic-mystical reworking of narrative materials and structures taken from the Zohar removes their mythological character and transforms them into a story that describes the consciousness of the mystic.

5 The trope of the window as an opening that allows an encounter between the soul and the King and the upper worlds is found in Sefer HaBahir, and appears afterwards in the Zohar and in other sources, all of which rely upon the verse, “Behold, he … looks from the windows” (Song of Songs 2:9). See Sefer HaBahir, 54, p. 25. 6 Elsewhere in Midrash Ruth in Zohar Chadash, Ben Gei’im tells Rabbi Nechunya about his ascent to the firmament, where he encountered angels who challenged, “Who allowed this creature born of woman among us here?” In the end, they allowed him to remain. He reached a great gate, whose opening on Sabbaths and holidays is accompanied by the proclamation, “Open the gates so that a righteous nation, one that is faithful, may enter” (Isaiah 26:2). He saw four windows, “and when the windows are opened, they all remove their garments and fly up through those windows and rise to this place” (Zohar Chadash, Part 2 [“Midrash Ruth”], pp. 208–209). 7 To the best of my knowledge, the figure of Rabbi Perachia appears solely in the “Midrash Ruth” in Zohar Chadash. He is mentioned eight times, five of them in the framework of the story here under discussion. 8 It is possible that the connection between the name Rabbi Perachia and the flying (poreach) of souls is alluded to later in the story, when the verse, “Stand back from a person the soul [of whose breath] is in his nostrils” (Isaiah 2:22) is interpreted as God saying that only when a person prays properly will his soul rest in his nose–otherwise, “it will rise upward” (ibid., p. 282).

Appendix Two Mysticism and the “Stream of Consciousness”: a Note Following the Analysis of “The Guest Who Came In” Despite the wide, if not unbridgeable, differences in culture and in language, literary technique and worldview between Rabbi Nachman’s creativity and the “stream of consciousness” style of writing that developed at the beginning of the twentieth century,1 undeniable points of similarity exist: a view of the mental processes as a field of meaningful occurrences resulting in the focus on a person’s consciousness, and the literary effort to give expression to a person’s stream of thoughts and feelings, while minimizing the importance of external reality, the apprehension of which is perceived as being dependent upon consciousness. The connection between a mystical worldview and “stream of consciousness” writing is not merely incidental. It is substantial. The mystical worldview attributes significance to a person’s inner world, recommending that a person focus on it to the point of temporary but complete disconnection from awareness of the external world.2 The enterprise of conscious attention is associated with a power that can influence external reality even without direct physical action.3 Some mystical approaches go so far as to see the entire external realm as an illusion, a “world of falsehood,” so that “what we see in the world is only illusory,”4 whereas the only true reality is the world revealed to the eyes of the spirit.5 That is the ideational environment that yields the statement that “a person clings to where his thoughts are,” indicating that consciousness is the realm in which true existence and activity occur, and that the sole meaningful act is the inner act. The mystical worldview can thus serve as a fitting background to the development of a form of writing that focuses on a person’s consciousness, because such

1 There exists an extensive literature on the stream of consciousness as a genre and writing technique. Some sources are: Freidman, Stream of Consciousness; Humphrey, Stream of Consciousness; Frieden, Genius; Steinberg, The Stream of Consciousness Technique. 2 Rivka Schatz-Oppenheimer’s Hasidism as Mysticism emphasizes these aspects in Hasidism. 3 The relationship between the mystical experience and the ability to magically affect reality stands at the core of Idel’s Hasidism: Between Ecstasy and Magic. 4 As stated by Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, founder of Chabad Hasidism and Rabbi Nachman’s contemporary and colleague (Boneh Yerushalayim, p. 54). 5 See Elior, Paradoxical Ascent, and in particular pp. 25–35. And see above in Chapter 3, note 51, the statement of Rabbi Ephraim of Sudilkov regarding external reality being decided by the inner reality.



Mysticism and the “Stream of Consciousness” 

 351

writing is interested in the phenomena of the external world only insofar as they relate to a person’s inner world. The existence of a mystical stream of consciousness in the creative work of a Hasidic admor at the beginning of the nineteenth century says nothing about the modern context of the “stream of consciousness” literature that developed at the beginning of the twentieth century. However, it is possible that an understanding of the inner logic of that mystical stream of consciousness can open up new trains of thought that are relevant as well to certain aspects of twentieth century “stream of consciousness.” In that regard, I wish to point out an interesting cultural circumstance. The roots of the idea of the “stream of consciousness” are various. But there is no doubt that one of the most important nodes in its history is associated with the American psychologist and thinker, William James (1842–1910). James coined the term, “stream of consciousness,” and developed it into a complete psychological perspective. He developed this concept in order to describe human consciousness, with no reference to literary usage. Nevertheless, James’s studies not only provided the term and tool to conceptualize the new writing, but constituted an important element in the cultural climate from which the literary “stream of consciousness” evolved. A new understanding of human consciousness required a new literary treatment and new literary tools appropriate to the newly-revealed inner world of a human being.6 William James acquired his reputation not only as a psychologist but also as one of the most influential twentieth-century thinkers and researchers in the field of religion. In a series of lectures that comprise his Varieties of Religious Experience,7 James focused not on theological topics or on issues of ontology and epistemology but on the character of the religious experience and the religious state of consciousness–whose pinnacle, according to James, is the mystical experience. In this, James not only demarcated the field of his study, but attempted to identify the essence and motivating power of the religious phenomenon. In the last chapter of The Varieties of Religious Experience, James presented his personal view, accepting the outlook that sees a real world in the mystical experience: “we [have] no philosophic excuse for calling the unseen or mystical world unreal.”8 He stated as well, “The whole drift of my education goes to per6 James, The Varieties of Religious Experience. And see also ibid., The Stream of Consciousness, pp. 71–83. This topic is discussed in the books referenced above in note 1. 7 William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience. The series of lectures was delivered in 1901 and published in book form in 1902. 8 Ibid., p. 374.

352 

 Appendix Two

suade me that the world of our present consciousness is only one out of many worlds of consciousness that exist.”9 Religion, said James, has “some characteristic realm of fact as its very own.”10 This realm of fact–which springs from the link between human consciousness and the transcendent, Divine world–played such an important role in James’s cognitive and experiential world that he proclaimed that “the over-belief on which I am ready to make my personal venture is that they exist.”11 Thus, William James constitutes a fascinating and important junction between the mystical outlook and the development of the concept of “stream of consciousness.” It is no accident that James, who coined the term “stream of consciousness” as a description of the state of consciousness, is the person whose study in the field of religious and mystical experience led him to the conclusion, in accord with his disposition and education, that a spiritual reality exists–one that, although different from external being, is not to be dismissed as illusory. His words in this regard even imply a belief that the activity of a person’s consciousness has the power to affect external reality.12 Taking all of this into account, it is possible that the mystical viewpoint and the great significance that it attributes to consciousness as an independent realm served, in James’s thought and in the mediation of that thought by others, as an important element in the growth of new perspectives on human consciousness and of the place of consciousness in human life and, consequently, the development of the new and very important literary trend of “stream of consciousness.”13

9 Ibid., p. 376. 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid. 12 As indicated by an illustrative example that he gives (p. 374, note 359), whose context is a description of his personal viewpoint. 13 Of course, it is necessary to examine all other factors in this context, such as the thought of Bergson and its influence on the “stream of consciousness,” the influence of the writing of Henry James (William James’s younger brother) on the “stream of consciousness,” and, as well, the existence of mystical topics and tendencies in “stream of consciousness” literature. It appears to me that my words regarding the inherent connection between the mystical outlook and the focus on consciousness can serve as a strong basis for further research.

Appendix Three Photographs of Manuscript Pages

Fig. 3. Final page of manuscript of Rabbi Moshe Yehoshua Bezshilianski (Rabbi Alter Tepliker).

354 

 Appendix Three

Fig. 4a and b. The envelope in which Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz kept “The Story of the Bread” (MS Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias)



Photographs of Manuscript Pages 

 355

Fig. 5a. MS of Chayei Moharan of Rabbi Naftali b. MS of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias In the manuscript of Chayei Moharan of Rabbi Naftali and in the manuscript of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias that was in the hands of Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz, we find the use of a technique of additional concealment (in addition to the prohibition against revealing the story to an outsider). The most weighted part of the story–the emergence of the letters from Rabbi Nachman’s mouth in the combinations of the Ten Commandments and the entire Torah–is not written out in full; instead, only the first letter of each word is written. In the manuscript of Chayei Moharan of Rabbi Naftali, the letters are combined into acronyms, and in the manuscript of Rabbi Pinchas of Tiberias, they appear separate from each other, with a mark over each letter consisting of three dots in a triangular configuration.

356 

 Appendix Three

Fig. 6. MS of Rabbi Alter Tepliker.



Photographs of Manuscript Pages 

 357

Fig. 7. One of the middle pages in the MS of Rabbi Alter Tepliker. It is clearly more narrow than the original MS pages.

358 

 Appendix Three

Fig. 8. The first page of the lined pages in the MS of Rabbi Alter Tepliker.



Photographs of Manuscript Pages 

Fig. 9. The last page of the lined pages in the MS of Rabbi Alter Tepliker.

 359

360 

 Appendix Three

Fig. 10. A letter in the handwriting of R. Avraham Sternhartz.

Fig. 11. Poster announcing the broadcast of the “Tikun HaKlali” (“Universal Rectification”).

Bibliography Abrams, Daniel. HaGuf Ha’Elohi HaNashi BeKabbalah [Female body of God in kabbalistic literature]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5765. Agnon, Shmuel Yosef. “Sipur atzuv meiravakah zekeinah” [Sad story of an old maid]. In Takhrikh Shel Sipurim [A shroud of stories], pp. 210–215. Schocken Books, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, 5745. Altshuler, Mor. The Messianic Secret of Hasidism. Brill, Leiden and Boston, MA, 2006. Anshin, Natan. “Im lo rabbeinu, rachat aleinu” [If not for our rabbi, we would be lost]. Mishpachah 22 (Cheshvon 5766): p. 16. Assaf, David. Breslav, Bibliografyah Mueret [Bratslav: a referenced bibliography]. Zalman Shazar Center, Jerusalem, 5760. Assaf, David. “Adayin lo nishkat hariv; hama’avak neged chasidut breslav beshanot hashishim shel hameah hayod-tet” [The dispute has not yet been resolved: the fight against Bratslav Hasidism in the sixties of the nineteenth century]. Tzion 59 (5765): pp. 465–506. Auerbach, Erich. Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2003. Avigdor Kra of Prague (attributed to). Sefer HaPeliah [Book of wonders]. N.p., n.d. Avigdor Kra of Prague (attributed to). Sefer HaPeliah. N.p., Israel, 5737 (Koretz). Avot DeRebbe Natan, Sh. Z. Schechter edition. Rabbinical Council of America, New York, NY and Jerusalem, 5757. Band, Arnold. “The Bratslav theory of the sacred tale.” In Nahman of Bratslav: The Tales, pp. 29–39. Paulist Press, New York, NY 1978. Bartana, Ortsion. HaFantasyah BeSiporet Dor HaMedinah [Fantasy in Israeli literature in the last thirty years]. Hakibbuz Hameuchad, Tel Aviv, 5750. Barzel, Hillel. Bein Agnon LeKafka [Between Agnon and Kafka]. Bar-Uryan, Ramat Gan, 5733. Bezhshilianski, Moshe Yehoshua (Alter Tepliker). Hishtapkhut HaNefesh [Outpouring of the soul]. Jerusalem, 5664. Bezhshilianski, Moshe Yehoshua (Alter Tepliker). Meshivat Nefesh. Bnei Brak, n.d. Ben Harosh, Jonathan. “Sodo shel yanuka v’oro shel hasaba: hebetim poeti’im umitopoeti’im b’itzuv demut hayenuka bechativat ‘HaYenuka DeBalak’ beZohar” [Secret of the child and the light of the elder: poetic and mytheopoetic aspects of the shaping of the figure of the child in the “Yenuka” section in Balak, in the Zohar]. M.A. thesis, Hebrew University, 5768. Ben Yaakov, Moshe. Shushan Sodot [Lily of secrets].Tel Aviv, 5730. Bereishit Rabbah [Genesis homiletics] (Mirkin). Yavneh, Tel Aviv, 1956. Bereishit Rabbah [Genesis homiletics], Theodor and Albeck edition. Vahrman, Jerusalem, 5725. Bergman, Samuel Hugo. Dialogical Philosophy from Kierkegaard to Buber, translator Arnold Gerstein. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 1991. Bezanson, Yisrael Yitzchak. Ga’agu’im [Yearnings]. Shir Hadash, Tel Aviv, 5765. Biale, David. Eros and the Jews: From Biblical Israel to Contemporary America. Basic Books, New York, NY, 1992. Biale, David. “Hateshukah lesafganut bitnuah hachasidit” [The yearning for self-mortification in the Hasidic movement]. In Eros Eirusin V’Issurim: Miniut UMishpachah BeHistoriah [Eros, marriage and prohibitions: sexuality and family in history], editors Israel Bartal and Isaiah Gafni, pp. 213–224. Zalman Shazar Center, Jerusalem, 5758.

362 

 Bibliography

Bodek, Menachem Mendel. Pe’er MiKedoshim [Beauty of the saints]. In Sipurim Chasidi’im [Hasidic stories], G. Nigal edition, pp. 142–210. Hamakhon Lecheker Hasifrut Hachasidit, Tel Aviv, 2006. Buber, Martin. Penei Adam [The human face]. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 1962. Caro, Yosef. Maggid Meisharim [Teller of straightforward matters], editor Y. Bar-Lev. Petach Tikva, 5750. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). “Anshei Moharan” [Men of Rabbi Nachman], in Kokhavei Ohr [Shining stars]. Jerusalem, 5643. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). Hashmatot MeiChayei Moharan [Passages that had been removed from Chayei Moharan]. In Yemei HaTla’ot [Days of tribulation], pp. 188–206. Jerusalem, 5693. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). Kuntres Yemei HaTla’ot [The booklet, days of tribulation]. Jerusalem, 5693. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). Kokhavei Ohr [Shining stars]. Jerusalem, 5721. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). Avaneha Barzel [Its stones of bronze], Kokhavei Ohr [Shining stars]. Jerusalem, 5743. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). Avaneha Barzel [Its stones of bronze], Kokhavei Ohr [Shining stars]. Jerusalem, 5758. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). Biur HaLikutim [Collected explanations]. Jerusalem, 5763. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). Yemei HaTla’ot [Days of tribulation]. Jerusalem, 5757. Chazan, Avraham (R. Avraham ben R. Nachman of Tultshin). Chokhmah UVinah [Wisdom and understanding] (published together with Sipurei Ma’asiyot [Stories]). N.p., 5764. Chechik, Avraham Chaim. Reishit HaShanah [Beginning of the year]. Keren Hadpasah Dechasidei Breslav, Jerusalem, 5745. Cheshin, Eliezer. Matmonim: Genazim Shel Ohr MeiKivshonah Shel Chasidut Breslav 1 [Treasures: hidden treasures of light from the hidden archives of Bratslav Hasidism] (Tammuz 5768). Cohen-Alloro, Dorit. Sod HaMalbush UMar’eh HaMal’akh BeSefer HaZohar [Secret of the garment and appearance of the angel in the Zohar]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5747. Cordovero, Moshe. Pardes Rimonim [Pomegranate orchard]. Jerusalem, 5722. Cordovero, Moshe. Tomer Devorah [Date tree of Deborah]. Jerusalem, n.d. Dan, Joseph. HaSipur HaChasidi [The Hasidic story]. Keter Press, Jerusalem, 1975. Dan, Joseph. Sifrut HaMusar VeHaDerush [Ethical and homiletical literature]. Keter Press, Jerusalem, 1975. Dan, Joseph. Al HaKedushah: Dat Musar UMistikah BeYahadut UVeDatot Acheirot [On sanctity: religion, ethics and mysticism in Judaism and other religions]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5757. De Leon, Moshe. Shekel HaKodesh [The holy shekel]. London, 1911. De Vidas, Eliyahu Moshe. Reishit Chokhmah HaShaleim [The complete “Beginning of wisdom”]. Jerusalem, 5744. De Vidas, Eliyahu Moshe. Reishit Chokhmah HaMenukad [The vowelized “Beginning of wisdom”], 3 volumes. Jerusalem, 5757.

Bibliography 

 363

Doron, Erez Moshe. The Warriors of Transcendence, translator Deenah Rachel Misk. Lev Hadevorim, Mevo Choron, 2008. Dov Ber of Mezeritch. Maggid Devarav LeYa’akov [Telling His words to Jacob], Rivka Schatz-Oppenheimer edition. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5750. Dubnow, Simon. History of the Jews, Volume 1, translator I. Friedlaender. Ktav Publishing House, New York, NY, NJ, 1975. Edrei, Yehudah. Zohar BeLashon HaKodesh [The Zohar in the holy tongue]. Jerusalem, 5758. Elazar of Worms. Sefer HaRokei’ach HaGadol [The large “Book of the apothecary”]. Jerusalem, 5727. Elbaum, Dov. Into the Fullness of the Void: A Spiritual Autobiography, translator Azzan Yadin. Jewish Lights, Woodstock, VT, 2013. Elior, Rachel. Galya Razya–Mahadurah Bikoratit Al Pi Kitvei Yad Im Mavo Chilufei Nuscha’ot Umar’ei Mekomot [Revealed secret–critical edition based on manuscripts with an introduction of alternative readings and source references]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5741. Elior, Rachel. The Paradoxical Ascent to God: The Kabbalistic Theosophy of Habad Hasidism, translator Jeffrey M. Green. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 1993. Elior, Rachel. “R. Yosef Caro vehaBesht: metamorfoza mistit, hashra’ah kabbalit vehafnamah ruchanit” [R. Yosef Caro and the Baal Shem Tov: mystical metamorphosis, kabbalistic inspiration and spiritual internalization]. Tarbitz 65:4 (Tammuz-Elul 5756): pp. 671–709. Elior, Rachel. The Three Temples: On the Emergence of Jewish Mysticism, translator David Louvish. Littman Library, Portland, OR, 2004. Elior, Rachel. The Mystical Origins of Hasidism, translator Shalom Carmy. Littman Library, Portland, OR, 2006. Elstein, Yoav. Pa’amei Bat Melekh: Chekrei Tokhen VeTzurah BeSipuro HaRishon Shel R. Nachman MiBreslav [Steps of the princess: studies of the content and form in Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav’s first story]. Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 5744. Ephraim of Sudilkov. Degel Machaneh Efraim [Banner of the camp of Ephraim]. Jerusalem, 5754. Etkes, Immanuel. The Besht: Magician, Mystic, and Leader, translator Dr. Saadya Sternberg. Brandeis University Press, Lebanon, NH, 2005. Fishbane, Michael. “Contemplation of death in Jewish piety.” In The Exegetical Imagination: On Jewish Thought and Theology, pp. 136–150. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA and London, 1998. Fishbane, Michael. The Kiss of God: Spiritual and Mystical Death in Judaism. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA, 1994. Frieden, Ken. Genius and Monologue. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1985. Friedman, Bezalel Boruch. Ish Chasidechah: Perek Chaim … Shel HaChasid Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Bender … MiSeridei … Chasidei Breslav B’Uman [Your pious one: the life of the pious Rbbi Levi Yitzchak Bender, one of the last Bratslav Hasidim of Uman]. Jerusalem, 5753. Friedman, Melvin. Stream of Consciousness: A Study in Literary Method. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 1955. Friedman, Yehoshua Heschel. Siddur HaShalem, Makor Chokhmah, Part 2: Shabbatot VeChagim [Complete prayerbook, source of life, part 2: Sabbaths and holidays]. Lehadpasat Vehafatzat Sifrei Rabbeinu Rebbe Nachman Mibreslav, Beit Shemesh, 5768.

364 

 Bibliography

Galiko, Shmuel. Pa’amon VeRimon [Bell and pomegranate]. Amsterdam, 1708. Garb, Jonathan. Hofa’atav Shel HaKoach BaMistikah HaYehudit MiSifrut Chazal V’Ad Kabbalat Tzefat [Manifestations of power in Jewish mysticism, from the literature of the Talmudic sages to the kabbalah of Safed]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5765. Garb, Jonathan. The Chosen Will Become Herds: Studies in Twentieth-Century Kabbalah, translator Yaffah Berkovitz-Murciano. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 2009. Gedaliah of Linitz. Teshuot Chen [Outcries of appreciation]. N.p., 5768 (Berditchev 5576). Gikatilla, Joseph. Ginat Egoz [Nut garden]. Jerusalem, 5749. Gikatilla, Joseph. Sha’arei Orah [Gates of light], editor Y. Ben Shlomo. Jerusalem 5731. Ginzberg, Louis. The Legends of the Jews, Volume 1, translator Henrietta Szold. Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia, PA, 1909. Gissin, Ofer. R. Nachman MiBreslav: Torot, Sichot, Sipurei Ma’asiyot [Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav: teachings, talks, tales]. Yediot Achronot, Tel Aviv, 5769. Goldreich, Amos. “Birurim beriyato ha’atzmit shel ba’al Tikunei HaZohar” [Studies of the self-perception of the author of the Tikunei Zohar]. In Massu’ot: Mechkarim BeSifrut HaKabbalah UVeMachshevet Yisrael Mukdashim LeZikhro Shel Professor Ephraim Gottlieb [Beacons: studies in the literature of the kabbalah and in Jewish thought, dedicated to the memory of Professer Ephraim Gottlieb], editors Michal Oron and Amos Goldreich, pp. 459–499. The Bialik Institute, Tel Aviv, 1994. Goldstein, Nachman (Nachman of Tcherin). Yerach Ha’Eitanim [The month of Ethanim]. Jerusalem, 5711. Goldstein, Nachman (Nachman of Tcherin). Parpar’ot LeChokhmah [Condiments of wisdom]. Jerusalem, 5743. Goldstein, Nachman (Nachman of Tcherin). Parpar’ot LeChokhmah HaChadash [The new “Condiments of wisdom”]. Jerusalem, 5768. Goren, Zecharia. “Ha’eitz kesemel besipurei R. Nachman MiBreslav” [The tree as a symbol in the stories of R. Nachman of Bratslav]. Tura 2 (1992): pp. 66–80. Goshen-Gottstein, Alon. “Breslav v’Uman kemasa ishi ukema’abadah l’iyun beruchniyut” [Bratslav and Uman as a personal journey and as a laboratory for a study of spirituality]. In Ruchaniut Yehudit [Jewish spirituality], editors Moshe Idel, Benjamin Ish Shalom and Amy Bouganim. Awaiting publication. Green, Arthur. Tormented Master: A Life of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav. Jewish Lights, Woodstock, VT, 1992. Gris, Ze’ev. Sifrut HaHanhagot: Toldotehah UMkomah BeChayei Chasidav Shel HaBesht [Literature of personal disciplines: its development and place in the life of the Hasidim of the Baal Shem Tov]. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5750. Grossman, Abraham. “Shorashav shel kiddush the Lord b’Ashkenaz hakedumah” [The roots of martyrdom in early Ashkenaz]. In Kedushat HaChaim VeChiruf HaNefesh: Kovetz Ma’amarim LeZikhro Shel Amir Yekutiel [The holiness of life and martyrdom: a collection of essays in memory of Amir Yekutiel], editors Isaiah Gafni and Aviezer Ravitzky, pp. 99–130. Zalman Shazar Center, Jerusalem, 5753. Habermann, Abraham Meir. Anshei Sefer V’Anshei Ma’aseh: Sofrim, Chokrim, Bibliographim, Madpisim UMokhrei Seforim. [Reflections on writers, scholars, bibliographers, printers and book-dealers]. Mas, Jerusalem, 5734. Hacker, Joseph. “Klum hu’atak kiddush the Lord el techum haruach likrat ha’et hachadashah?” [Has martyrdom been spiritualized in recent times?]. In Kedushat HaChaim VeChiruf

Bibliography 

 365



HaNefesh: Kovetz Ma’amarim LeZikhro Shel Amir Yekutiel [The holiness of life and martyrdom: a collection of essays in memory of Amir Yekutiel], editors Isaiah Gafni and Aviezer Ravitzky, pp. 221–232. Zalman Shazar Center, Jerusalem, 5753. Hallamish, Mosheh. Hanhagot Kabbaliot BeShabbat [Kabbalistic customs of the Sabbath]. Orchot, Jerusalem, 5766. Hallamish, Mosheh. An Introduction to the Kabbalah, translators Ruth Bar-Ilan and Ora Wiskind-Elper. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 1999. Halbertal, Moshe. Concealment and Revelation: Esotericism in Jewish Thought and Its Philosophical Implications, translator Jackie Feldman. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2007. Heschel, Abraham Joshua. “R. Nachman miKosov, chaveiro shel haBesht” [R. Nachman of Kosov, colleague of the Baal Shem Tov]. In Sefer HaYovel LiKhvod Tzvi Vulfson LiMlot Lo Shiv’im VeChameish Shanah [Jubilee volume in honor of Zvi Wolfson on his seventy-fifth birthday], editor Saul Lieberman, pp. 113–141. American Academy for Jewish Research, Jerusalem, 5725. Heilman, Chaim Meir. Beit Rebbe. Bnei Brak, n.d. Hellner-Eshed, Melila. A River Flows from Eden: The Language of Mystical Experience in the Zohar, translator Nathan Wolski. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, 2009. Hershkovitz, Y. B. Kuntres Likutei Ma’amarim LeRosh Hashanah [Booklet of collected essays on Rosh Hashanah]. Kiryas Yoel, NY, 5747. Horowitz, Yeshayahu. Shenei Luchot HaBrit [Two tablets of the covenant]. Jerusalem, 5735. Horowitz, Rivka. “Ha’echad meir et ha’acher: bein Shai Agnon leR. Nachman miBreslav” [One illumines the other: between Shmuel Yosef Agnon and R. Nachman of Bratslav]. In BeDarkhei Shalom: Iyunim BeHagut Yehudit Mugashim LeShalom Rozenberg [In the ways of peace: studies in Jewish thought dedicated to Shalom Rosenberg], editor Benjamin Ish Shalom, pp. 153–246. Beit Morasha, Jerusalem, 5767. Horowitz, Shmuel. Yemei Shmuel [Days of Shmuel]. Horowitz, Jerusalem, 5742. ––. Tzion HaMetzuyenet [The outstanding marker]. Uman Express, Jerusalem, 5760. Humphrey, Robert. Stream of Consciousness in the Modern Novel, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, Los Angeles, CA, and London, 1968. Hundert, Gershon. Jews in Poland-Lithuania in the Eighteenth Century: A Genealogy of Modernity. University of California Press, Berkley, CA, 2004. Huss, Boaz. “Chakham adif minavi: R. Shimon bar Yochai uMoshe Rabbeinu baZohar” [A sage is superior to a prophet: R. Shimon bar Yochai and Moses in the Zohar]. Kabbalah 4 (5759): pp. 103–139. Ibn Aldabi, Meir. Shevilei Emunah [Paths of faith]. Flecker, Warsaw, 1863. Ibn Gabbai, Meir. Tola’at Yaakov [O worm, Jacob]. Zolkow, 5559. Idel, Moshe. “Letoldot ha’issur lilmod kabbalah lifnei gil arba’im” [On the history of the prohibition against learning kabbalah before the age of 40]. AJS Review 5 (1980): pp. 1–20. Idel, Moshe. Kabbalah: New Perspectives. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 1988. Idel, Moshe. The Mystical Experience in Abraham Abulafia, translator Jonathan Chipman. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 1988. Idel, Moshe. Studies in Ecstatic Kabbalah. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 1988. Idel, Moshe. Golem: Jewish Magical and Mystical Traditions on the Artificial Anthropoid. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 1990. Idel, Moshe. Hasidism: Between Ecstasy and Magic. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 1995.

366 

 Bibliography

Idel, Moshe. R. Menachem Recanati HaMekubal. Schocken Books, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, 5758. Idel, Moshe. “Yofya shel ishah: letoldoteha shel hamistikah haYehudit” [Beauty of a woman: towards the history of Jewish mysticism]. In BeMa’agalei Chasidim–Kovetz Mechkarim LeZikhro Shel Professor Mordechai Vilensky [On Hasidic paths–a collection of studies in memory of Professor Mordecai Wilensky], editors David Assaf and Elchanan Reiner, pp. 317–334. Jerusalem, 5760. Idel, Moshe. Absorbing Perfections: Kabbalah and Interpretation. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT 2002. Idel, Moshe. “Nishmat Eloha: al Elohiyut haneshamah eitzel haRamban veha’askolah shelo” [Divine soul: on the divinity of the soul in the view of Nachmanides and his school]. In HaChaim KeMidrash: Iyunim BePsikhologyah Yehudit LiKhvod Professor Mordechai Rotenberg [Life as a homily: studies in Jewish psychology, in honor of Professor Mordecai Rotenberg], editors Shahar Arzy, Michal Fachler and Baruch Kahane, pp. 338–380. Yediot Achronot, Tel Aviv, 2004. Idel, Moshe. Kabbalah and Eros. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 2005. Idel, Moshe. “HaBesht kenavi ukhemagikon talismani” [The Baal Shem Tov as prophet and talismanic magician]. In Ma’aseh Sipur: Mechkarim BaSiporet HaYehudit Mugashim LeProfessor Yoav Elshtain [Narrative: studies in Jewish story-telling in honor of Professor Yoav Elsein], editors Avidav Lipsker and Rella Kushlefsky, pp. 121–145. Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 5766. Idel, Moshe. Olam HaMalakhim: Bein Hitgalut LeHitalut [World of angels: between revelation and elevation]. Sifrei Chemed, Tel Aviv, 2008. Idel, Moshe. “‘L’olam the Lord devarkhah nitzav’: iyunim betorah mukdemet shel haBesht vegilguleha beChasidut” [“Forever, Lord, Your word is firm”: studies in the early doctrine of the Baal Shem Tov and its development in Hasidism]. Kabbalah 20 (5769): pp. 219–286. Idel, Moshe. “Torah chadashah [New Torah]–Messiah and the New Torah in Jewish Mysticism and Modern Scholarship.” Kabbalah 21 (2010): pp. 57–109. James, William. The Principles of Psychology. Cosimo, Inc., New York, NY, 2007. James, William. “The stream of consciousness.” In The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates, editors Ned Block, Owen Flanagan and Guven Guzeldere. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1997. James, William. The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. Arc Manor, LLC, Rockville, MD, 2008. Jung, Carl. Dreams, translator R. F. C. Hull. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, and Oxford, 2010. Kaidonover, Tzvi Hirsch. Kav HaYashar HaShaleim. Jerusalem, 5759. Kapshian, David. Rosh Hashanah Shel Tzaddik Ha’Emet. N.p., 5758. Katz, Jacob. Masoret UMashber: HaChevrah HaYehudit BiMotzei Yemei Habeini’im [Tradition and breakdown: the Jewish community after the Middle Ages]. Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5718. Katz, Jacob. Halakhah VeKabbalah [Halachah and Kabbalah]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5746. Keter Shem Tov [Crown of a good name]. Brooklyn, NY, 5747. Kimelman, Reuven. “Lecha Dodi” VeKabbalat Shabbat: HaMashma’ut HaMistit [“Come my beloved” and receiving the Sabbath: the mystical meaning]. Cherub Press, Los Angeles, CA, and Jerusalem, 5763.

Bibliography 

 367

Koenig, Natan Tzvi. Yikra DeChayei [The value of life] (published together with She’eirit Yisrael [Remnant of Israel]). Bnei Brak, 5723. Koenig, Natan Tzvi. Naveh Tzaddikim [Habitation of the righteous]. Kollel Breslav, Bnei Brak, 5729. Kook, Abraham Isaac. Orot HaTeshuvah. Mossad HaRav Kook, Jerusalem, 5745. Kramer, Chaim. Through Fire and Water: The Life of Reb Noson of Breslov, editor Avraham Greenbaum. Breslov Research Institute, Jerusalem and New York, NY, 1992. Kronah, Moshe. Morai VeRabotai Achai VeRei’ay [My teachers and rabbis, my brothers and friends]. Moreshet, Tel Aviv, 5747. Kurzweil, Baruch. Masot Al Sipurei Shai Agnon [Essays on the stories of Shmuel Yosef Agnon]. Schocken Books, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, 5730. Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev. Kedushat Levi HaShaleim [The complete “Holiness of Levi”]. Jerusalem, 5718. Levin, Shmaryahu. Yalduti [My childhood]. Davar, Tel Aviv, 5721. Lewinsky, Yom Tov. “Al hayeshiva hagedolah belomza lifnei yovel shanim” [Regarding the great yeshiva in Lithuania fifty years ago]. In Yeshivot Lita: Pirkei Zikhronot [Lithuanian yeshivas: memoirs], editors Immanuel Etkes and Shlomo Tikochinsky, pp. 347–360. Zalman Shazar Center, Jerusalem, 2004. Lida, Dovid. Divrei Dovid [Words of David] (Warsaw 5630). In Seforim Kedoshim MiTalmidei Baal Shem Tov [Holy books from the students of the Baal Shem Tov], Volume 72. Hillel Press, Brooklyn, NY, 5749. Lieberman, Chaim. Ohel Rachel [Tent of Rachel], Volume 1. C. Lieberman, New York, NY, 5740. Lieberman, Chaim. Ohel Rachel [Tent of Rachel], Ohel Rachel [Tent of Rachel], Volume 3. C. Lieberman, New York, NY, 5744. Liebes, Esther. “Ahavah vitzirah behaguto shel R. Borukh miKosov” [Love and creativity in the thought of R. Borukh of Kosov], Ph.D. dissertation, Hebrew University, 5757. Liebes, Yehudah. “Magamot becheker Chasidut Breslav: lebikoroto shel Yod Mondshine al ma’amari ‘Hatikun haklali shel R. Nachman MiBreslav veyachaso leShabata’ut’” [Strategies in study of Bratslav Hasidism: regarding Yehoshua Mondshine’s criticism of my essay, “The universal rectification of R. Nachman of Bratslav and its connection to Sabbatianism”]. Tzion 47 (5742): pp. 224–231. Liebes, Yehudah. “Hamoshiach shel haZohar” [The messiah of the Zohar]. In HaRa’ayon HaMeshichi BiYisrael: Yom Iyun LeRegel Melei’at Shemonim Shanah LeGershom Scholem [The messianic idea in Israel: a day of study on the occasion of the eightieth birthday of Gershom Scholem], pp. 87–236. Massada, Jersualem, 5750. Liebes, Yehudah. “Hatikun haklali shel R. Nachman miBreslav veyachaso leShabata’ut” [The universal rectification of R. Nachman of Bratslav and its connection to Sabbatianism], in Sod Ha’Emunah HaShabata’it [The secret of Sabbatian faith], pp. 238–261, 429–448. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5755. Liebes, Yehudah. “Hachidush shel R. Nachman miBreslav” [The innovation of R. Nachman of Bratslav]. Daat 45 (summer 5760): pp. 91–103. Liebes, Yehudah. Torat HaYetzirah Shel Sefer Yetzirah [The doctrine of creation of the Book of Creation]. Schocken Books, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, 5761. Likutim Yekarim [Precious anthology]. Kahan edition, Jerusalem, 5758. Lipiner, Eliyahu. Chazon Ha’Otiot: Torat Ha’Idaot Shel Ha’Alfabet Ha’Ivri [Vision of the letters: the doctrine of the ideals of the Jewish alphabet]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5749.

368 

 Bibliography

Lipsker, Avidav. “Hakallah veshivat hakabtzanim: leshe’elat mekorotav shel sipur hamisgeret shel ma’aseh meihazayin bettlers” [The bride and the seven beggars: toward the question of the sources of the frame story of the story of the seven beggars]. Mechkerei Yerushalayim BeFoklore Yehudi [Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Folklore] 13–14 (5752): pp. 229–248. Lipsker, Avidav. “Nisyono shel Matya ben Charash: teimah bein telus miti letelus chevrati” [The test of Matya ben Charash: between mythic and societal telos]. Mechkerei Yerushalayim BeFoklore Yehudi [Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Folklore] 19–20 (5757–5758): pp. 345–363. Lorberbaum, Yair. “Kabbalat haRamban al beriat ha’adam betzelem Elohim” [The kabbalah of Nachmanides regarding the creation of man in the image of God], in Kabbalah 5 (5760), pp. 287–326. Luria, Dovid. Pirkei DeRebbe Eliezer Im Biur HaRadal [Chapters of Rebbe Eliezer, with commentary of David Luria]. Warsaw, 5612. Maimonides, Moses. The Guide of the Perplexed, translator S. Pines. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1963. Malkiel, Eliezer. Chokhmah UTmimut [Wisdom and simplicity]. Yediot Achronot, Tel Aviv, 2005. Malkiel, Eliezer. Masa El HaSod [Journey to the secret]. Yediot Achronot, Tel Aviv, 2007. Marcus, Ivan. Rituals of Childhood: Jewish Acculturation in Medieval Europe. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, 1996. Margolin, Ron. “Hafnamat chayei hadat vehamachashavah bedoroteha harishonim shel haChasidut: mekoroteha uveisisah ha’epistomologi’im” [Internalization of religious life and thought in the initial generations of Hasidsim: its epistomelogical sources and foundations]. Ph.D. dissertation, Hebrew University, 5759. Margolin, Ron. Mikdash Adam: HaHafnamat HaDatit V’Itzuv Chayei HaDat HaPenimi’im BeReishit HaChasidut [Sanctuary of man: religious internalization and shaping of the inner life of religion at the beginning of Hasidsim]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5765. Mark, Zvi. “Sipurei R. Nachman miBreslav–existentialism Chasidi: zihuyam umashma’am shel elementim existentialistim besipurei R. Nachman miBreslav” [Stories of R. Nachman of Bratslav–Hasidic existentialism: the identity and meaning of existential elements in the stories of R. Nachman of Bratslav]. M.A. thesis, Bar Ilan University, 5753. Mark, Zvi. “Lama radaf haRav Moshe Tzvi miSavran et R. Natan miNemirov v’et Chasidei Breslav” [Why did Rabbi Moshe Tzvi of Savran persecute R. Natan of Nemirov and Bratslav Hasidim?]. Zion 69:4 (5764): pp. 487–500. Mark, Zvi. Mysticism and Madness: The Religious Thought of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav, translator Y. D. Shulman. Continuum Books, London and New York, NY, 2009. Mark, Zvi. “Mivchan tzeirufei ha’otiot: al tekes chanikhah misti she’avar R. Nachman miBreslav v’al heidav besefer Likutei Moharan” [Test of letter combinations: regarding the mystical initiatory ceremony that R. Nachman of Bratslav underwent and its echoes in Likutei Moharan]. Daat 68–69 (5770): p. 133–147. Mark, Zvi. The Scroll of Secrets: The Hidden Messianic Vision of R. Nachman of Breslav, translator Naftali Moses. Academic Studies Press, Brighton, MA, 2010. Mark, Zvi. “Hachavurah hamistit: al chezyonoteihem shel R. Shmuel Eizik miDashev veR. Yitzchak Eizik miTirhavitze mitalmidav harishonim shel R. Nachman miBreslav” [The mystical comrades: regarding the visions of R. Shjmuel Eizik of Dashev and R. Yitzchak Eizik of Tirhavitze, who were among the first students of R. Nachman of Bratslav]. Awaiting publication.

Bibliography 

 369

Mark, Zvi. “Meichezyon letorah: al mekorotav hachezyoni’im shel hasefer Likutei Moharan.” [From vision to teaching: regarding the visionary sources of Likutei Moharan]. Awaiting publication. Mark, Zvi. “Seridei eish: hasefer Likutei Moharan veHaSefer HaNisraf” [Remants of conflagration: Likutei Moharan and Sefer HaNisraf]. Mechkerei Yerushalayim BeMachshevet Yisrael [Jerusalem studies in Jewish thought] 22 (awaiting publication). Megged, Aaron. Persephone Zocheret [Perespehone Remembers]. Zemorah-Beitan, Tel Aviv, 2000. Meir ibn Gabbai. Avodat HaKodesh [Holy service]. Jerusalem, 5714. Meir, Jonathan. “Tikun habrit, Chasidei Breslav vimei hashovevim” [Rectification of the covenant, Bratslav Hasidism and the days of sexual purification].In Rechovot HaNahar: Kabbalah Ve’Ekzoteriut BIrushalayim (5656–5708) [Paths of the river: kabbalah and exotericism in Jerusalem (5656–5708). Awaiting publication. Mekhilta DeRebbe Yishmael [Homiletics of Rabbi Ishmael]. Horowitz and Rubin edition, Jerusalem, 5758. Menachem Nachum of Chernobyl. Mei’or Einayim [Light of the eyes]. Jerusalem, 5759. Mendilov, Adam Abraham. Ba’ayat HaZeman BeSiporet [Problem of time in narrative]. Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 5735. Meroz, Ronit. “Milikutei Efraim Penzieri: derashat ha’Ari birushalayim vekavanot ha’akhilah” [Anthology of Ephraim Penzieri: the homily of the Ari in Jerusalem and intention in eating] .Mechkerei Yerushalayim BeMachashevet Yisrael [Jerusalem studies in Jewish thought] 10 (5752): pp. 211–257. Midrash Rabbah [Homiletics]. Mirkin edition, Tel Aviv, 5752. Midrash Tanchuma HaMenukad [Vowelized “Tanchuma homiletics”]. Buber edition, Jerusalem, 5735. MiReishit V’Ad Acharit [From beginning to end]. Meior HaNachal, Bnei Brak (?), 5761 (?). Mondshine, Yehoshua. “Al ‘Hatikun haklali shel R. Nachman miBreslav veyachaso leShabta’ut’” [Regarding “The universal rectification of R. Nachman of Bratslav and its relationship to Sabbatianism”]. Zion 47 (5742): pp. 198–223. Morris, Leah. “Hapeh hayoled briot vehatikun hamishichi shel R. Nachman miBreslav” [The mouth creates creatures and the messianic rectification of R. Nachman of Bratslav]. Dimui 19 (winter 5761): pp. 42–29. Nabarro, Assaf. “Tikun: mikabbalat ha’Ari legorem tarbuti” [Rectification: from the kabbalah of the Ari to a cultural factor]. Ph.D. thesis, Ben Gurion University, 5766. Nachman of Bratslav. Likutei Moharan HaMenukad [The vowelized “Anthology of R. Nachman”]. Jerusalem, 5754. Nachman of Bratslav. Sipurei Ma’asiyot HaMenukad [The vowelized “Stories”]. Jerusalem, 5745. Nigal, Gedaliah. HaSiporet HaChasidit Toldoteha VeNoseha [The Hasidic story, its history and its themes]. Marcus, Jerusalem, 1981. Ohr Ha’Emet [The light of truth]. Brooklyn, NY, 5720 (photocopy of Husyatin edition, 5659). Ohr Torah (Rimzei Torah) [Light of Torah (hints of Torah)]. Jerusalem 5716. Ohr Uman [Light of Uman]. Jerusalem, 5753. Oron, Michal. “HaPeliah vehaKaneh: yesodot hakabbalah shebahem emdatam vadatit chevratit vederekh itzuvam hasifrutit” [the works haPeliah and haKaneh: their kabbalistic

370 

 Bibliography



foundations, their religious-social stance and their literary shape] . Ph.D. dissertation, Hebrew University, 1980. Oron, Michal. “‘Simini kechotam al libeikh’: iyunim bepoetikah shel ba’al haZohar beSabba DeMishaptim” [“Place me as a seal upon your heart”: studies of the poetics of the author of the Zohar in Sabba DeMishpatim]. In Massu’ot: Mechkarim BeSifrut HaKabbalah UVeMachshevet Yisrael Mukdashim LeZikhro Shel Professor Ephraim Gottlieb [Beacons: studies in the literature of the kabbalah and in Jewish thought, dedicated to the memory of Professer Ephraim Gottlieb], editors Michal Oron and Amos Goldreich, pp. 1–24. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 1994. Peretz, Y. L. Ketavim [Writings]. Devir, Tel Aviv, 1926. Piekarz, Mendel. Chasidut Breslav: Perakim BeChayei MeCholelah, BiKhtaveha UViSfichecha [Bratslav Hasidism: chapters in the life of its creator, in its writings and in its aftermaths], expanded edition. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5756. Piekarz, Mendel. BImei Tzemichat HaChasidut: Magamot Ra’ayanot BeSifrei Derush UMusar [In the days of the flourishing of Hasidism: ideational strategies in books of homiletics and ethics], second, expanded edition. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5758. Piekarz, Mendel. HaHanhagah HaChasidit: Samkhut Ve’Emunat Tzaddikim B’Aspaklariat Sifrutah Shel HaChasidut [Hasidic conduct: authority and faith in tzaddikim through the lens of Hasidic literature]. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5759. Pinchas Eliyahu of Vilna. Sefer HaBrit HaShaleim [the complete “Book of the covenant”]. Jerusalem, 5750. Pinchas-Cohen, Chava. “R. Nachman miBreslav, gibor tarbut akhshavi” [R. Nachman of Bratslav, contemporary cultural hero]. Dimui 19 (5761): p. 2. Pirkei DeRebbe Eliezer [Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer]. Warsaw, 5634. Pirkei DeRebbe Eliezer [Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer]. Jerusalem, 5743. “P’nu lachem tzafonah” [Turn to the north]. Ohr Ha’Orot, Ketivah V’Arikhah Mei’Ohr HaNachal– Breslav [Light of lights, writing and editing of the light of the river–Bratslav] 14. (n.d.). Prianti, Sarah. “Akhilah betorato shel R. Nachman miBreslav: hebetim misti’im v’tiurgi’im” [Eating in the doctrine of R. Nachman of Bratslav: mystical and theurgical aspects]. M.A. thesis, Ben Gurion University, 5759. Rabinowitz, Tzadok Hacohen MiLublin. Tzidkat HaTzaddik [The righteousness of the tzaddik]. Beit El, 5748. Rapoport-Albert, Ada. “Confession in the circle of R. Nahman of Bratslav.” Bulletin of the Institute of Jewish Studies 1 (1973): pp. 65–96. Roob, Alexander. Alchemy and Mysticism: The Hermetic Museum, translator Shaun Whiteside. Taschen, Koln, 2001. Roth, Aharon. “Ma’amar pegam hayesod” [Essay on a blemish of the “foundation”]. In Taharat HaKodesh [Purity of the holy]. Jerusalem, 5728. Sagi, Abraham. Albert Camus and the Philosophy of the Absurd, translator Batya Stein. Rodopi, Amsterdam, 2002. Sagi, Abraham. Kierkegaard, Religion, and Existence: The Voyage of the Self, translator Batya Stein. Rodopi, Amsterdam and Atlanta, GA, 2000.

Bibliography 

 371

Sagiv, Gad. “Chasidut Chernobyl: toldoteha vetoroteha mireishitah v’ad erev milchmet ha’olam harishonah” [Chernobyl Hasidism: its development and its teachings from its beginning to the eve of the first world war]. Ph.D. dissertation, Tel Aviv University, 5770. Satlow, Michael L. “‘Wasted seed’: the history of a rabbinic idea.” Hebrew Union College Annual 65 (1994): pp. 75–137. Schatz-Oppenheimer, Rivka. Hasidism as Mysticism: Quietistic Elements in Eighteenth Century Hasidic Thought, translator Jonathan Chipman. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1993. Schick, Eliezer Shlomo. Asher BaNachal [In the river], Volume 3. Hasidei Breslav, Jerusalem, 5736. Schick, Eliezer Shlomo. Asher BaNachal [In the river], Volume 6. Hasidei Breslav, New York, NY, 5738. Schick, Eliezer Shlomo. P’Ulat HaTzaddik [Deed of the Tzaddik]. Hasidei Breslav, New York, NY, 5738. Schick, Eliezer Shlomo. P’Ulat HaTzaddik [Deed of the Tzaddik]. Hasidei Breslav, New York, NY, 5741. Schick, Eliezer Shlomo. P’Ulat HaTzaddik [Deed of the Tzaddik]. Hasidei Breslav, Jerusalem, n.d. Schick, Eliezer Shlomo. Asher BaNachal, Mahadurah Menukedet [In the river, vowelized edition], Volume 14. Hasidei Breslav, Jerusalem, n.d. Schiller, Friedrich. Naïve and Sentimental Poetry, and On the Sublime; Two Essays, translator Julius A. Elias. F. Ungar Publishing, New York, NY, 1967. Schneur Zalman of Liadi (attributed). Boneh Yerushalayim [He builds Jerusalem]. Jerusalem, 5686. Scholem, Gershom. “Levush haneshamot vechaluka derabbanan” [The garment of the souls and the rabbinic robe]. Tarbitz 25 (5715): pp. 290–305. Scholem, Gershom. Pirkei Yesod BeHavanat HaKabbalah USmaleha [Fundamental chapters in understanding the kabbalah and its symbols] , translator Yosef Ben Shlomo. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5741. Scholem, Gershom. “Devekut or communion with God.” In Essential Papers on Hasidism: Origins to Present, editor, G. D. Hundert. New York University Press, New York, NY, 1991. Scholem, Gershom. “Hitpatchut musag hatzaddik bemistikah haYehudit uvaChasidut” [Development of the concept of the tzaddik in Jewish and Hasidic mysticism]. In HaShlav Ha’Acharon: Mechkerei HaChasidut Shel Gershom Scholem [The final stage: the Hasidic studies of Gershom Scholem], editors, David Assaf and Esther Liebes, pp. 185–225. Am Oved, Jerusalem, 5769. Seder Eliyahu Zuta [The lesser order of Elijah], in Seder Eliyahu Rabbah VeSeder Eliyahu Zuta [The greater order of Elijah and the lesser order of Elijah], M. Ish Shalom edition. Bamberger and Vahrman, Jerusalem, 5729. Sha’arei Tzedek: Biur Sefer Yetzirah [Gates of righteousness: explanation of the Book of creation] (bound together with Sulam Ha’Aliyah [The ladder of ascent]). Sha’arei Ziv, Jerusalem, 5749. Sha’arei Tzion [Gates of Zion]. Podgurze (Cracow), 5660. Sha’arei Tzion [Gates of Zion]. Przemysl, 5677. Shagar (Rosenberg, Shimon Gershon). Keilim Shevurim [Broken vessels]. Yeshivat Siach Yitzchak, Efrat, 5764. Shagar (Rosenberg, Shimon Gershon). HaPur Hu HaGoral [The lottery]. Yeshivat Siach Yitzchak, Efrat, 5765.

372 

 Bibliography

Shapira, Yehudah Tzvi. HaDerekh LaTzaddik [The way to the tzaddik]. Jerusalem, 5760. Shem Tov ben Gaon. Peirush Sodot HaTorah Al Pi HaKabbalah Ha’Amitit LeHaRamban [commentary on the secrets of the Torah according to the true tradition of Nachmanides]. In Meor VeShemesh [Light and sun]. R. Yehudah ben Avraham Rafael Coriat edition, Livorno, 5599. Shivchei HaBesht Ketav Yad [MS Praises of the Baal Shem Tov], R. Yehoshua Mondshine edition. Mondshein, Jerusalem, 5742. Shklovskii, Viktor. “Art as technique.” In Russian Formalist Criticism, translator Lee T. Lemon and Marion J. Reis, pp. 5–24. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE, 1965. Shore, Eliezer. “Letters of desire: language, mysticism and sexuality in the writings of Rabbi Nahman of Bratzlav.” Ph. D. dissertation, Bar-Ilan University, 2005. Sifrei Devarim [Rabbinical commentary on Deuteronomy]. A. A. Finkelstein edition. Rabbinical Council of America, New York, NY, 5729. Sefer HaBahir [Book of Clarity]. Reuven Margaliot edition. Mossad HaRav Kook, Jerusalem, 5754. Sefer HaKaneh [The Reed]. Jerusalem 5734 (Cracow 5654). Steinberg, Erwin Ray (editor). The Stream of Consciousness Technique in the Modern Novel. Kennikat Press, New York, NY, and London, 1979. Sternfeld, Noah Halevi. Gidulei HaNachal [Plants of the river]. Agudat Meshekh Hanachal, Jerusalem, 5744. Sternhartz, Avraham. Rinat Tzion [Song of Zion]. Bnei Brak, 5735. Sternhartz, Avraham. Tovot Zikhronot [Good memories]. Bnei Brak, 5738. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Chayei Moharan [Life of R. Nachman]. Lemberg, 5634. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Chayei Moharan [Life of R. Nachman]. Frampol, 5673. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Alim LeTerufah [Leaves of Healing]. New York, NY, 5715. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Kitzur Likutei Moharan [Abridged Likutei Moharan]. Jerusalem, 5739. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Yemei Moharanat [Days of R. Natan]. Jerusalem, 5742. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Chayei Moharan [Life of R. Nachman]. Jerusalem, 5743. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Likutei Halakhot [Collected halachot]. Jerusalem, 5744. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Likutei Tefillot HaMenukad [Vowelized “Collected prayers”]. Jerusalem, 5749. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Chayei Moharan HaMenukad [Vowelized “Life of R. Nachman]. Jerusalem, 5755. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Shivchei Haran [Praise of R. Nachman]. Jerusalem, 5755. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Sichot Haran. Jerusalem, 5755. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Chayei Moharan Im HaHashmatot [“Life of R. Nachman” with suppressed passages restored]. Jerusalem, 5760. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Chayei Moharan Im Hashmatot [“Life of R. Nachman” with suppressed passages restored]. Beit Shemesh, 5765. Sternhartz, Natan (Natan of Nemirov). Chayei Moharan [Life of R. Nachman]. Published by R. Aharon Tsigelman, Warsaw, 5688. Tikun HaKlali [Universal rectification]. Zeevi family, Ramat Hasharon, 5762. Tikun Haklali [Universal rectification]. Even Shetiah Institute, Beitar Illit, 5766. Tikun Haklali [Universal rectification]. Ha’Eish Sheli, N.p., n.d.

Bibliography 

 373

Tikun Haklali HaMeforash [Universal rectification, with commentary]. Lev HaDevorim, Mevo Choron, 2006. Tikunei Zohar [Rectifications of the Zohar], Reuven Margaliot edition, Jerusalem, 5754. Tikunei Zohar, BeTosefet Targum Shel R. Yehudah Edrei [Rectifications of the Zohar, with added translation of R. Yehudah Edrei]. Jerusalem, 5758. Tishby, Isaiah. Mishnat HaZohar [Doctrine of the Zohar], Part 2. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5742. Tishby, Isaiah. Torat HaRa VeHaKelippah BeKabbalat Ha’Ari [The doctrine of evil and the husk in the kabbalah of the Ari]. Schocken Books, Jerusalem, 5752. Todorov, Tzvetan. The Fantastic: A Structual Approach to a Literary Genre, translator Richard Howard. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1975. Tosefta [Additions]. Lieberman edition, Jerusalem 5753–5756. Travis, Yakov. “Adorning the souls of the dead–Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav and tikkun ha-neshamot [rectification of souls].” In God’s Voice from the Void: Old and New Studies in Bratslav Hasidism, editor Shaul Magid, pp. 155–192. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 2002. Tsanin, Mordechai. Milon Ivri-Yiddish Shaleim [Complete Hebrew-Yiddish dictionary]. Letzte Neies, Tel Aviv, 5754. Turner, Victor. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1969. Tzava’at HaRivash [The Will of the Baal Shem Tov]. Brooklyn, NY, 5756. Tzioni, Menachem. Peirush Al HaTorah [Commentary on the Torah]. Jerusalem, 5724. Tzuker, Shlomo. “Ketav yad mireishit hasifrut haChasidit” [MS from the earliest Hasidic literature] . Kiryat Sefer 49 (5734): pp. 223–235. Uman Rosh Hashanah: Kedushat HaMakom, Sichot, Ma’amarim, Nesiot BeChiruf Nefesh, Reshamim, Niflaot VeSipurei Mofet [Uman Rosh Hashanah: holiness of the site, talks, essays, journeys with self-sacrifice, impressions, wonders and miracle stories]. Uman Rosh Hashanah, n.p., 5768. Van Gennep, Arnold. The Rites of Passage. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1961. Vayikra Rabbah [Homilies on Leviticus]. Margoliot edition, New York, NY and Jerusalem, 5753. Vital, Chaim. Adam Yashar [Straight man]. Jerusalem, 5731 (Cracow, 5645). Vital, Chaim. Eitz Chaim, Sidrat Kitvei Rabbeinu Ha’Ari [Tree of life, series of the writings of our rabbi, the Ari]. New York, NY, 5755. Vital, Chaim. Likutei Torah, Sidrat Kitvei Rabbeinu Ha’Ari [Tree of life, series of the writings of our rabbi, the Ari], Volume 14. New York, NY, 5755. Vital, Chaim. Pri Etz Chaim, Sidrat Kitvei Rabbeinu Ha’Ari [Fruit of the tree of life, series of the writings of our rabbi, the Ari], Volume 2. New York, NY, 5755. Vital, Chaim. Sha’ar HaGilgulim, Sidrat Kitvei Rabbeinu Ha’Ari [Gate of Reincarnations, series of the writings of our rabbi, the Ari]. New York, NY, 5755. Vital, Chaim. Sefer HaLikutim, Sidrat Kitvei Rabbeinu Ha’Ari [Anthology, series of the writings of our rabbi, the Ari]. New York, NY, 5755. Vital, Chaim. Sha’ar HaPesukim, Sidrat Kitvei Ha’Ari [Gate of verses, series of the writings of our rabbi, the Ari], Volume 8. New York, NY, 5755. Vital, Chaim. Sha’ar Ruach HaKodesh, Sidrat Kitvei Ha’Ari [Gate of the Holy Spirit, series of the writings of our rabbi, the Ari], Volume 12. New York, NY, 5755.

374 

 Bibliography

Vital, Chaim. Sefer Ta’amei HaMitzvot, Sidrat Kitvei Ha’Ari [Book of Reasons for the Commandments, series of the writings of our rabbi, the Ari], Volume 14. New York, NY, 5755. Wax, Ron. “Hanesiyah leRebbe Nachman miBreslav leRosh Hashanah: etgar, nisayon vetikun ve’emunah” [The journey to Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav for Rosh Hashanah: challenge, test and rectification and faith]. In BeRosh Hashanah Yikateivun: Kovetz Ma’amarim Al Rosh Hashanah [On Rosh Hashanah they are inscribed: collection of essays on Rosh Hashanah], editor Amnon Bazak, pp. 97–115. Tevunot, Alon Shvut, 5763. Weitzhandler, Avraham. Nachal Soreik [Soreik River]. Jerusalem, 5749. Weitzhandler, Avraham. Siach Sarfei Kodesh, Volumes 1–5. Meshekh Hanachal, Jerusalem, 5754; Volume 6. Meshekh Hanachal, Jerusalem 5760. Wertheim, Aaron. Law and Custom in Hasidism, translator Shmuel Himelstein. Ktav, Hoboken, NJ, 1992. Weiss, Joseph. Mechkarim BeChasidut Breslav [Studies in Bresalv Hasidism], editor Mendel Piekarz. The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 5755. Weinstock, Moshe. “Chidush shelo yei’amen: al hakibbutz haYehudi b’Uman beRosh Hashanah” [Unbelievable innovation: regarding the Jewish gathering in Uman on Rosh Hashanah]. Akdamot 25 (Elul 5770): pp. 15–38. Wiskind-Elper, Ora. Tradition and Fantasy in the Tales of Reb Nahman of Bratslav. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 1998. Wolfson, Elliot R. “The secret of the garment in Nahmanides.” Daat 24 (winter 5750): English section, pp. XLIX-XXV. Wolfson, Elliot R. “The cut that binds: time, memory and ascetic impulse (reflection on Bratslav Hasidism).” In God’s Voice from the Void: Old and New Studies in Bratslav Hasidism, Shaul Magid (editor), pp. 103–154. SUNY Press, Albany, NY, 2002. Wolfson, Elliot R. Language, Eros, Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutic and Poetic Imagination. Fordham University Press, New York, NY, 2005. Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye. Toldot Ya’akov Yosef [Generations of Jacob: Joseph]. Jerusalem, 5733. Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye. Ketonet Passim [Coat of Colors], G. Nigal edition. Jerusalem, 5745. Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye. Tzafnat Pa’aneach [Decoder of Secrets]. G. Nigal edition, Jerusalem, 5749. Yalkut HaMakhiri LiTehillim [Makhir homilies on psalms], Solomon Buber edition, Berditchev, 5660. Yaron-Dayan, Noa. Mekimi [You raise up]. Keset, Tel Aviv, 2007. Yehudah HaLevi. Sefer HaKuzari, translator Yehudah Ibn Shmuel. Jerusalem, 5733. Yehudah Leib Alter. Sefat Emet [Lip of truth]. Jerusalem, 5731. Yisraeli, Oded. Parshanut HaSod VeSod HaParshanut: Magamot Midrashiot VeHermeneutiot BeSabba DeMishpatim SheBeZohar [Interpretation of secrets and the secret of interpretation: midrashic and hermeneutic strategies in Sabba DeMishpatim of the Zohar]. Cherub Press, Los Angeles, CA, 5765. Yitzchak of Akko. Meirat Einayim [Light of the eyes]. Jerusalem, 5753. Yungerlieb, Yitzchak (Yitzchak of Radvil). Ohr Yitzchak [Light of Isaac]. Jerusalem, 5721. Sack, Bracha. BeSha’arei HaKabbalah Shel Rebbe Moshe Cordovero [In the gates of the kabbalah of Rabbi Moshe Cordovero]. University of Ben Gurion, Jerusalem, 5755.

Bibliography 

 375

Zilberman, Pinchas. Uman, Kakh Nifratzah HaDerekh–Sipur HaNesiot HaRishonot Shel R. Gedaliah Fleer SheYichyeh ShePatchu Et HaDerekh LeTziun Rabizal B’Uman [Uman, thus was the way breached–the story of the first journeys of R. Gedaliah Fleer (may he live) that opened the way to the grave of our rabbi (of blessed memory) in Uman]. Zilberman, Jerusalem, 5761. Zilbershlag, Yitzchak. “A. M. Habermann: diyukno ufiryono” [A. M. Habermann: his portrait and prolificacy]. In Yad LeHeiman: Kovetz Ma’amarim LeZeikher A. M. Habermann [A memorial to Heiman–a collection of essays in memory of A. M. Habermann], editor Z. Malachi, pp. 377–394. Machon Habermann LeMekhkerei Sifrut, Lod, 5744. Zohar, Reuven Margaliot edition, Jerusalem, 5745. Zohar Chadash. N.p., 5761.

Name Index Abraham, 49, 122, 123 (note 90) Abulafia, Abraham, 52 (note 88) Adam, 47, 219, 220 Adel (daughter of Rabbi Nachman), 169 (note 114), 201 Agnon, Shmuel Yosef, 91 (note 5), 96 (note 13), 162 (note 88), 195 (note 9) Aharon of Bratslav, 175, 177, 180, 181, 183, 222, 224-226, 231 (note 28), 232, 233, 238, 239, 252, 262, 266, 327 (note 48) Akiva (Rabbi), 10, 47, 186, 213, 217, 283, 284 Alkabetz, Shlomo, 53 (note 90) Amar, Shlomo, 323 Anshin, Meir, 195 Ari. See Luria, Yitzchak Arush, Shalom, 319 Aryeh Leib of Shpole, 18, 286, 287, 288, 300, 306 (note 72), 314 Asher Zelig of Teplik, 182 (note 155), 198 Assaf, David, 212 (note 47), 254 (note 109) Auerbach, Erich, 126 (note 92) Avraham son of Rabbi Nachman of Tulchyn, 8 (note 2), 29 (note 3), 72, 73, 181, 182, 205, 205, 207, 215-223, 315 Baal Shem Tov. See Israel Baal Shem Tov Barsky, Shimshon, 315 (note 9) Bender, Levi Yitzchak, 60 (note 114), 115 (note 63), 207, 208, 315 Benyon, Amir, 323 (note 33) Berger, Leibel, 3, 33, 34 Bergson, Henri, 349 (note 13) Berland, Eliezer, 132, 319, 321 Bezalel, 16, 22, 25 Bezshilianski, Moshe Yehoshua. See Tepliker, Alter Bodek, Menachem Mendel, 17 (note 37) Borukh of Mezhibozh, 11, 12, 18, 51, 314 Breiter, Yitzchak, 314 Buber, Martin, 95 (note 13), 102 (note 24) Caro, Yosef, 53 (note 90), 108 (note 44), 112 (note 57), 162, 280 (note 8)

Chaikl (Hasid of Rabbi Nachman), 37, 79, 85, 87 Chaim Vital 35 (note 25), 117, 148 (note 19), 240 (note 66), 241 (note 66) Chazan, Avraham. See Avraham son of Rabbi Nachman of Tulchyn. Chechik, Shmuel b. Rabbi Avraham Chaim, 325 (note 37) Cheshin, Eliezer, 3, 207 Cohen, Sagiv, 323 (note 34) Cordovero, Moshe, 43, 116, 118 (note 72), 149 (note 25), 192, 240 (note 66), 271 Dahari, Yaniv, 323 (note 34) Dan, Joseph, 166 (note 104), 307 (note 73) David, 112, 123 (note 90), 171, 172, 174, 191, 203 (note 21), 216, 217, 219-224, 275, 296 (note 48), 324 (note 37), 342 de Leon, Moshe, 40106 (note 33) de Vidas, Eliyahu, 43, 236, 244, 271 Dorfman, Michel, 204, 207 Dov Ber of Mezeritch, 12, 97, 147 (note 17), 246 (note 87), 316 (note 10) Elbaum, Dov, 313 (note 3) Elbaz, Reuven, 323 (note 32) Elior, Rachel, 52 (note 90), 108 (note 44), 112 (note 57), 280 (note 8), 296 (note 47) Ephraim of Ossatin (Rabbi Nachman’s father-in-law) 21 Ephraim of Sudilkov, 15-18, 20, 108 (note 46), 110 (note 51), 122, 123, 247, 347 (note 5) Etkes, Immanuel, 113 (note 60), 118 (note 75) Feiga (mother of Rabbi Nachman), 199-201 Fishbane, Michael, 280 (note 8), 282 (note 14) Friedman, Shmuel Heschel (son of Rabbi Avraham Tzvi), 9 (note 7) Gabizon, Shevi, 313 (note 4) Garb, Jonathan, 13 (note 21), 317 (note 14) Gedaliah of Linitz, 24 Goldreich, Amos, 52 (note 88) Goren, Zecharia, 108 (note 41)

378 

 Name Index

Goshen-Gottstein, Alon, 325 (note 37), 330 (note 56), 336 (note 66) Grandfather of Shpole. See Aryeh Leib of Shpole Green, Arthur, 51 (note 86), 52 (note 88), 54 (note 94), 60, 127 (note 97), 142 (note 2), 143 (note 3), 252 (note 107), 256, 296 (note 48), 308 (note 76) Habermann, Abraham Meir, 195-197 Hacohen, Yehoshua Heschel, 146 (note 17), 147 (note 17), 315 (note 9) Halbertal, Moshe 79, (note 149), 84 (note 159) Hershkovitz, Y. B., 325 (note 37) Heschel, Abraham Joshua, 245, 246 (note 87) Horowitz, Shmuel, 8 (note 2), 29 (note 3), 34, 181, 183, 195, 205, 230, 251 (note 103), 255 (note 112), 303, 326 (note 46), 351, 352 Horowitz, Yeshayahu, 41, 244, 271, 344 (note 1) Hundert, Gershon, 247 (note 88) Idel, Moshe, 3 (note 21), 16, 52 (note 88, 90), 58, 83 (note 157), 153 (note 49), 283 (note 16), 347 (note 3) Israel Baal Shem Tov, 11, 15-18, 20, 24, 25, 40, 49, 50, 51, 79 (note 151), 82, 83 (note 157), 108, 109, 112, 113, 118 (note 75), 122, 123, 128, 131, 132, 211 (note 43), 221, 223, 227, 245, 246, 247, 252, 253 (note 107), 255, 280 (note 8), 289, 290, 291, 296, 298, 299, 309, 310, 316 (note 10) Jacob, 49, 123 (note 90), 216, 221, 223, 234, 272 James, Henry, 349 (note 13) James, William, 118 (note 74), 348, 349 Joseph, 105 (note 29), 123 (note 90), 149, 151, 208, 209, 219-221, 223, 224, 234, 235, 270, 272, 273, 280, 292-298, 302, 310, 341, 342 Kaidonover, Tzvi Hirsch, 146 (note 17) Kapshian, David, 329 (note 53) Koenig, Eliezer, 322

Koenig, Gedaliah, 315 Koenig, Natan Tzvi, 196, 206, 212 (note 45) Kook, Abraham Isaac HaCohen, 155 (note 59) Korman, Yitzchak Meir, 34, 35 (note 22), 36 (note 27), 183, 195-198, 203, 204, 206, 207, 226, 230, 231 (notes 26-28), 255 (note 112), 303 (notes 61-65), 304 (notes 66, 67) Kramer, Chaim Menachem, 169 (note 114), 262 (note 5) Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev, 53 (note 90), 305, 306, 309 Levi, Nati, 323 (note 34) Levin, Shmaryahu, 10 (note 12) Lewinsky, Yom Tov, 9 (note 8) Liebermensch, Natan, 184 (note 166) Liebes, Judah, 52 (notes 88, 90), 54 (note 98), 68 (note 136), 127 (note 96), 142 (note 2), 150 (note 31), 164 (note 97), 167 (note 100), 171 (note 126), 226, 227, 234, 245, 252 (note 107), 255 (note 113), 264, 269 (note 14) Lipl, Hirsch Leib, 203, 206, 207 Lipsker, Avidav, 90 (introductory note), 120 (note 77), 153 (note 46) Lubarski, Zalman, 196, 197 Luria, Yitzchak, 9 (note 6), 20, 35 (note 25), 40 (note 44), 43-45, 62, 82, 83 (note 157), 148 (note 19, 20), 149 (note 25), 154 (note 49), 240, 241 (note 66), 243, 244, 279, 292 (note 14), 293, 295, 296, 299, 304, 344. See also kabbalah of the Ari (in subject index) Maggid of Mezeritch. See Dov Ber of Mezeritch Maggid of Tirhavitze. See Yekutiel of Tirhavitze Maggid of Zlatshov. See Yechiel Michel of Zlatshov Maimonides, Moses, 54 (notes 96, 98), 57 (note 103), 86 (note 164), 123 (note 88), 151 (note 38), 164 (note 98), 185 (note 169) Malkiel, Eliezer, 313 (note 3)



Name Index 

 379

Mark, Zvi, 1 (notes 1, 2), 9 (note 6), 25 (note 53), 52 (note 88), 53 (note 93), 56 (note 100), 57 (note 104), 59 (note 108), 60 (note 115), 68 (note 136), 79 (note 152), 88 (note 169), 102 (note 24), 109 (note 47), 113 (note 60), 118 (notes 73, 75), 123 (note 91), 133 (note 100), 133 (note 102), 150 (note 31), 151 (notes 36, 39), 171 (note 126), 192 (note 3), 193 (notes 4, 5), 196 (note 11), 198 (16), 202 (note 20), 204 (note 23), 209 (note 35), 210 (note 38), 212 (note 47), 213 (note 50), 220 (note 75), 221 (note 77), 225 (note 1), 253 (note 107), 256 (notes 116, 117), 283 (note 16), 284 (note 18), 290 (note 33), 305 (note 71), 314 (note 5), 317 (note 12), 339 (note 1) Mashali, Shimon, 323 (note 32) Matya ben Charash, 153 Mazursky, Paul, 313 (note 4), 329, 334 (note 62) Mazuz, Meir, 329 (note 53) Megged, Aharon, 313 (note 4) Meir ibn Gabbai, 40 Menachem Nachum of Chernobyl, 147 (note 17) Menachem Tzioni, 12 Mintz, Guy, 323 (note 33) Molcho, Shlomo, 296 (note 47) Mordechai of Neskhiz, 18 Moses, 2, 40, 47, 52, 54-61, 70-73, 80, 81, 83, 88, 89, 123 (note 90), 131-133, 149, 151, 165 (note 100), 174, 217, 218, 220, 222, 238, 252, 253 (note 107), 339 Moshe Bratslaver, 197 Moshe Tzvi of Savran, 314

Naftali of Nemirov, 225 (note 1) Narkis, Lior, 323 (note 34) Natan b. Rabbi Yehudah, 14 (note 25) Natan of Gaza, 269 (note 14) Natan of Nemirov, 14 (note 25), 16, 30, 32, 35, 38, 39 (note 39), 64 (note 128), 68, 69, 90 (note 2), 122, 139, 144 (note 6), 154 (note 52), 158, 160, 166 (105), 168, 169, 175, 177, 181, 182 (note 155), 184 (note 166), 193, 197-199, 203 (note 21), 205, 206 (note 27), 221, 225 (note 1), 226 (note 6), 234 (note 34), 243, 250-252, 254, 256 (note 117), 262 (note 5), 263-265, 267, 278, 279, 287, 298, 300-302, 307, 308 (note 76), 309, 310, 314, 315, 319 (note 23), 320, 321, 325-327, 332, 336 (note 67) Nissan Kolir, 51

Nachman Chayales, 196 (note 12) Nachman of Horodenka, 11, 211 (note 43) Nachman of Kosov, 246 (note 87) Nachman of Tcherin, 8, 9 (note 7), 24 (note 52), 29 (note 3), 30, 34, 90 (note 2), 140 (note 6), 168 (note 111), 181, 182, 184, 197, 198, 206, 226 (note 6), 230, 263 (note 5), 265, 303, 320, 324 (note 37) Nachman of Tulchyn, 8 (note 2), 182, 187, 221, 267

Rand, Shuli, 313 (note 4) Rosenberg, Shimon Gershon, 313 (note 3) Roth, Aharon, 164 (notes 95, 97) Rozin, Eliyahu Chaim, 315

Odesser, Israel Ber, 30 (note 3), 181, 228, 317 Oron, Michal, 111 (note 55), 249 (note 98) Palagi, Chaim, 323 Perachia, 108 (note 41), 344-346 Peretz, Y. L., 90 (note 5) Peterburger, Avraham, 39 (note 39) Piekarz, Mendel, 32, 52 (note 88), 79 (note 153), 127 (note 97), 156 (note 61), 159 (note 73), 165 (note 102), 211 (note 41), 267 (note 13), 318 Pinchas Eliyahu of Vilna, 58 Pinchas of Koretz, 38 (note 37) Pinchas of Tiberias, 34, 35 (note 22), 26 (note 29), 37 (note 30), 38 (note 37), 85 (note 161), 91 (note 6), 92 (note 8), 204 (note 24), 230, 351, 352

Samson, 153 Sashiah (wife of Rabbi Nachman), 200 Schatz-Oppenheimer, Rivka, 98 (note 14), 245, 246 (note 86), 299 (note 52), 357 (note 2)

380 

 Name Index

Schick, Eliezer Shlomo, 32, 33, 100 (note 19), 227, 228, 262 (note 5), 318, 330 (note 56) Schneur Zalman of Liadi, 212, 316 (note 10), 237 (note 4) Scholem, Gershom, 299 (note 52), 344 (note 1) Shachna (son of Rabbi Natan), 321 Shagar. See Rosenberg, Shimon Gershon Shapira, Meir, 315 Shapira, Yehudah Tzvi, 325 (note 37) Shimon bar Yochai, 40 (note 41)52 (note 88), 82, 83 (note 157), 165 (note 100), 252, 253 (note 107), 328 Shlomo Ephraim (son of Rabbi Nachman) 339 Shmerl of Berditchev, 34, 182, 204, 230, 231 (note 31) Shmuel Shmelke (son of Alter Tepliker), 203 Sinwani, Chaim, 323 (note 32) Sternhartz, Avraham, 197, 198, 203, 204, 206, 207, 315, 326, 357 Teitelbaum, Yoel, 323 (note 32) Tepliker, Alter, 182, 198, 350 Tishby, Isaiah, 105 (note 26), 106 (note 33), 108 (note 42) Travis, Yakov, 299 (note 51) Tsigelman, Aharon, 314 Turner, Victor, 19, 23 (note 50) Tzvi Hirsch of Zhiditzov, 53 (note 90) Van Gennep, Arnold, 19 Vinberg, Naftali. See Naftali of Nemirov

Weiss, Joseph, 29 (note 1), 30 (note 7), 31 (note 8), 38 (note 37), 39 (note 39), 90 (note 2), 127 (note 96, 97), 133 (note 101), 199 (note 18), 226, 280, 303 (note 59) Weiss, Yitzchak Yaakov, 323 (note 32) Weitzhandler, Avraham, 60 (note 114) Wolfson, Elliott, 46 (note 67), 107 (34), 151 (note 39), 152 (note 39), 153, 154 (note 50)293 (note 40) Yaakov Halevi, 304 (note 70) Yaakov Shimshon of Shepetovka, 53 (note 91) Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, 108, 112 (note 57), 147 (note 17), 211 (note 43), 247, 299 (note 52) Yaron-Dayan, Noa, 313 (note 4) Yechiel Michel of Zlatshov, 27 (note 37) Yechiel, Erez, 323 Yehudah HaLevi, 57 (note 103) Yekutiel of Tirhavitze 51 Yishaya Shalom, 1, 8 Yisrael, Chaim, 323 (note 34) Yitzchak of Safrin, 53 (note 90) Yitzchak (son-in-law of Rabbi Nachman), 168, 169 (note 114) Yosef, Ovadia, 323 Yudl of Dashev, 18 (note 3), 35, 38, 48, 49, 152, 198 Yuska (son-in-law of Rabbi Nachman) 169 (note 114)

Subject Index Alienation, 85, 86, 94-100, 103, 104 (note 25), 125 Amulet and mantra, 317, 320, 323, 324 Asceticism, 41, 42, 46, 153, 154, 159, 243, 312. See also desires, breaking Beggar, the sixth, 40, 245, 257, 258, 263-268, 272, 274, 276, 278, 292, 307, 341 Blessing recited on food, 37, 44, 45, 62, 63 Bratslav Hasidism: overall, 46 (note 67), 80, 88, 127 (note 96), 181, 191, 210, 215, 312-319, 338, 339; Rabbi Nachman as Hasidic rebbe, 40, 73, 87, 140, 165 (note 100), 179, 185, 252, 327, 328, 332, 335, 336. See also amulet and mantra; messiah; messianism (in Bratslav Hasidism); secret (and Bratslav Hasidism); tzaddik; tzaddik (Rabbi Nachman as tzaddik); wonders Castration, 151, 152, 153, 154, 160, 186 Ceremonies of passage. See rites Charity, 144, 155, 158, 159, 161, 177-179, 183-187, 259, 269, 276, 312, 320, 327, 330 Clinging to God and to holiness, 13, 22, 98 (note 14), 104, 108-113, 125-127, 284 (note 18) Clothing: its meaning, 102-104, 106-108, 156-161, 194, 344-346; white clothes, 156-160 Conversation, 102 (note 24), 103, 106, 112, 181, 198, 208, 220, 281, 312 Covenant, blemishes of. See seed, spilling in vain Death: as punishment for holy presumptuousness, 56, 251-253, 255; dying, 53, 55, 56 (note 100), 105, 107, 133, 139-141, 144, 159, 161, 178, 186 (note 171), 188, 190, 191, 223 (note 83), 228, 233, 236-238, 240-242, 244, 245, 247, 257, 267, 268, 272, 279-285, 289-293, 296-298, 300-304, 306-312, 314, 315,

339, 341, 342; Rabbi Nachman’s final days, 307-311. See also martyrdom; sanctification of God’s name Desires, breaking, 48, 49, 64, 65, 68, 143 (note 3), 145, 151-153, 164, 166, 167, 193, 195, 209, 210, 214, 215, 223 Dispute, 60, 81, 83, 212 (note 47), 250-254, 286-289, 300, 314, 339 Dissociation. See alienation Dreams, 17-19, 35-37, 49-51, 68, 73, 74-76, 91 (note 7), 100, 101 (note 22), 127, 133 (note 101), 134, 176 (note 137), 260, 265, 303-309. See also states of consciousness; Yom Kippur (dream about) Eros. See sexuality Eroticism. See sexuality Evil inclination: and fantasies, 167, 223 (note 83), 235 (note 39), 246; in the service of God, 210-213. See also desires, breaking; Lilith; sexuality; tests Failure, 10-12, 19-22, 27, 28, 49, 56, 71, 121, 132, 166, 167, 176 (note 136), 213, 216, 217, 255 (note 113), 305, 310. See also tests Fantasy, 94, 100, 313 (note 4) Fire, immersion in, 36, 42, 43, 76, 78 Food: breaking desires for, 31, 35, 36, 40 (note 40), 41, 43-46, 49, 50, 55, 65, 68, 76, 203, 209; harmful eating 199, 202, 203 (note 21); holiness in 32, 35, 36, 39, 40-46, 50, 52, 62, 63-65, 69, 72, 77, 209 Garment. See clothing Golem, 13, 22 Guest, nature of, 93-131 Hagiography, 307 Halachah, 55, 86, 146, 151, 161, 249, 335. See also Caro, Joseph (in name index); Maimonides, Moses (in name index)

382 

 Subject Index

Hanukkah, 62 (119), 91, 100 (note 19), 115 (note 63), 126 (note 93), 235 Hasidism, 17 (note 37), 20, 53 (note 90), 79, 83 (note 157), 97 (note 14), 110, 115, 211 (note 41), 280 (note 8), 312 (note 2), 316 (note 10) Healing, 153, 164 (note 97), 237, 257, 259-265, 267, 268, 273-277, 298, 302, 342 Heikhalot literature, 126 Heresy, 258 Husk, 16, 17, 149-151, 162, 167, 169-173, 176, 178, 192, 209, 210, 236, 240, 242, 245-247, 265, 276, 294, 295, 297, 299, 301, 310, 340, 341 Illusions, 347. See evil inclination (and fantasies). Jewish law. See halachah Joy, 9, 10, 20-23, 26-28, 37, 79, 85, 87, 105, 147 (note 17), 186, 188, 238, 245, 258, 262, 263, 265, 266, 268, 275, 276, 277, 298, 302, 313, 332, 333, 342 Kabbalah: in Bratslav Hasidism, 13 (note 21), 14, 28, 64, 65, 70, 71 (note 140), 100, 105 (note 26), 107 (note 34), 110, 116, 245, 248, 270, 313, 335; of the Ari, 9 (note 6), 20, 148 (note 20), 149 (note 25), 293, 296, 299, 304 (note 770), 341; of Rabbi Moshe Cordovero, 149 (note 28), 192. See also Abulafia, Abraham (in name index); Sefer HaBahir; Sefer Yetzirah; Zohar Learning secrets, 8, 24, 33, 58, 59, 84, 86 (note 164), 105, 110, 111 (note 55), 119, 197, 248, 344 Letter combinations, 7-28 Levirate marriage, 231, 233, 238-243, 248-250, 255 Lilith, 147-149, 162, 169-172, 175, 236 (note 50), 245 (note 79), 265, 276, 297 Love: between Rabbi Nachman and his Hasidim 37, 79, 81, 83, 85-88, 254, 332; between the king and the princess 261,



265; of God for Jews 286, 289, 304; of Jews for God 16, 22, 217, 283, 293, 294

Martyrdom, 281-284, 294-296, 298, 300, 303, 307 Maskilim, 278 Melody 168 (note 111), 170, 172, 173, 175, 186, 219, 220, 245, 260, 262, 263, 265, 266, 268, 272, 274, 275, 276, 298, 299, 301, 302, 317, 340 Messiah, 24, 25, 52 (note 88), 54 (note 94), 58-61, 83 (note 157), 89, 133, 174, 191, 209, 217, 218, 220, 221, 235, 252 (note 107), 280, 296, 316-318, 320 (note 23), 337, 339, 340, 342, 343 Messianism: in Bratslav Hasidism, 54 (note 94), 220, 264, 316-319, 337, 338; Rabbi Nachman as messiah, 24, 25, 60, 89, 123, 133, 209 (note 35), 217, 218, 220, 221, 280, 296, 339, 342. See also redemption; Sabbatianism Mikveh, immersion in, 36, 73, 142-144, 178, 190 Miracles. See wonders Mount Sinai, 40, 44 (note 61), 46, 47, 54-60, 66, 71, 81, 83, 88, 132, 149, 218 Nature, 64, 65, 110 (note 51), 118, 222, 238, 240 Passover, 38, 52, 71, 267, 279 Patriarchs, revelation of, 49 Philosophy, 54, 59, 77, 82, 95 (note 13), 105 (note 26), 258, 313, 348 Prayer, 16, 17, 20, 36, 63, 64, 74, 76, 97, 98, 122, 139, 160, 191, 212 213, 216, 235, 281, 282, 284 (note 18), 300-302, 304-306, 310, 318, 329 (note 53), 340. See also Shema, recitation of Princess, 259-262, 264, 265, 267, 275, 298 Promises, 18, 49, 119, 144 (note 8), 178, 267, 275, 279, 302, 305, 311, 325, 327, 330-332, 335, 337 Prophecy, 52, 57, 83, 88



Rectification: Pilgrimage to Rabbi Nachman’s gravesite, 39-41, 144, 178-180, 182-190, 243, 266-269, 277, 279, 280, 298, 302, 311-313, 316 (note 10), 319-321, 324-332, 334-338, 342 Recitation of Psalm 107, 299 Recitation of psalms, 36, 73, 169-172, 184, 186, 242, 275 Rectification for a nocturnal emission, 139, 140, 142-148, 166-169, 172, 173, 176-180, 184, 185, 188-191, 203 (note 22), 214, 222-226, 229, 230, 233, 237, 240, 241, 243-246, 249-251, 255-258, 262 (note 5), 263, 266, 268, 269, 275, 276, 292, 294, 297, 298, 311, 312, 320-323 Rectification for business and money, 155, 156, 158-161, 187 Rectification for souls of the dead, 278, 299 (note 51), 307, 310 Rectification of sexual desire. See rectification of the covenant. Rectification of speech, 45, 65 (note 130), 66, 67, 115 (note 63), 155-157, 159, 161, 186, 187, 312 Rectification of the covenant, 45, 46, 62, 69, 146 (note 17), 150, 151, 154, 156-159, 161, 163, 165, 166, 172, 184 (note 167), 185, 189, 203 (note 21), 210, 215, 220, 223, 235, 263, 265, 269-273, 296-298, 302, 321, 341, 342 Rectification on Rosh Hashanah, 141, 187, 218, 324-326, 329-332, 336-338 Rectification, personal, for Rabbi Nachman’s Hasidim, 165 (note 102), 179, 298, 311, 328, 332, 335 Rectifications, changes and development, 143, 145, 155 (note 59), 160, 180, 186, 190, 271, 312, 315, 323. See also amulet and mantra; Sabbatianism; self-mortification; tears; Uman Ten psalms, their identification and publication, 168, 172, 176, 177, 179, 180, 184-186, 188-190, 228, 251, 262 (note 5),

Subject Index 

 383



264, 266, 267, 269, 320, 321, 323, 327, 330, 332, 337 Universal rectification, 46, 139 (note 3), 140, 142-146, 151-161, 168 (note 111), 176, 177, 179-192, 226-228, 231 (note 31), 235, 243, 252 (note 105), 255 (note 113), 257, 263, 266, 268-272, 292, 297, 298, 302, 311, 312, 320-324, 327, 330-332, 337, 342, 343, 357 Worldwide universal rectification, 330-332, 337, 343 Redemption, 54, 59, 60, 141, 191, 215, 219, 220, 316-320, 329 (note 53), 337, 338, 341, 342. See also messiah Reincarnation, 228, 239 (note 61). 248 (note 96), 249, 298, 310, 341. See also levirate marriage Repentance, 21 (note 46), 28, 65, 147 (note 17), 155, 163-167, 185, 187-189, 218, 220, 244, 246 (note 87), 247, 270-272, 300, 322, 330, 331, 335, 336, 342 Revelation, 7, 14, 37 (note 30), 49, 51-53, 56-61, 66, 67, 77, 79, 80-85, 88, 123, 131, 133, 149-151, 192, 194, 200, 209, 210, 215, 220, 296, 318, 319 (note 23). See also Mount Sinai; tests (mystical); vision Rites, 9-11, 14, 18-20, 23 (note 50), 24, 28, 44 (note 61), 249, 330, 339 Rituals, 10, 139-142, 144-146, 152-154, 158, 160, 177-180, 189, 190, 268, 275, 292, 320, 327, 328, 330, 334, 336 River of fire. See fire, immersion in Rosh Hashanah: overall, 62 (note 119), 159 (note 75), 187, 188, 218, 288, 312-316, 319 (note 21), 324-334, 336-338, 342; Tashlikh 312, 333, 334 Sabbatianism: and Frankism, 227, 255, 256; overall, 142, 227, 228, 255, 256, 269 Sabbaths and holidays: elevation of the soul on the Sabbath eve, 298, 299 (note 51); holiness of, 17, 52, 107, 123, 153, 154, 159, 219, 244, 289, 290, 298, 299, 322, 346 (note 6) Sacrificing one’s good name, 284-289. See also martyrdom

384 

 Subject Index

Sanctification of God’s name: in martyrdom, 180, 218, 282, 283, 289-294, 296-298, 300-306, 310, 311, 341, 342; martyrs killed by government forces, 284, 291-294, 296-298, 300-302, 310, 341 Secret: and Bratslav Hasidism, 17, 18, 23, 24, 32, 39, 57-59, 61, 68, 71, 80-88, 105, 110, 111 (note 55), 115, 119, 197, 198, 213, 225-228, 231-233, 240, 257, 288, 293 (note 40), 299, 340, 344 (note 1); factors in esotericism, 248-255 Seed, spilling in vain, 46, 142, 146-148, 154, 161-167, 172, 176, 178, 184 (note 167), 185, 189, 223, 228, 234, 236-238, 240-247, 250, 263-266, 270-273, 275, 276, 292-299, 302, 310, 321, 341, 342 Sefer HaBahir, 46, 105, 106 (note 33), 346 (note 5) Sefer HaPeliah, 117, 248 (note 96), 249 Sefer Yetzirah, 22, 62 Sefirot, 106 (33), 116, 117 (note 71), 118 (note 72), 169, 270, 271, 295, 297 (note 49) Self-mortification: overall, 28, 42, 50 (note 84), 143 (note 3), 152 (note 39), 160, 165, 243, 244, 245, 247, 251, 276 fasting 36, 40, 41, 43, 49, 50 (note 84), 52, 65 (note 130), 74, 75, 139, 165, 243, 244, 246, 247, 251, 302; scouring the intestines 41 (note 50), 74, 76 Self-sacrifice. See martyrdom Service of God, 22, 210, 211, 218, 283 (note 16), 291 Sexuality: overall, 145, 151 (note 39), 152, 154, 160, 176 (note 136), 193, 203 (note 21), 215-224, 234, 235, 263, 270, 272, 335, 340, 341; sexual desire, 48, 64, 65 (notes 131, 132), 68 (note 136), 145, 147-152, 192-194, 200, 208-210, 213-224, 223; sexual gazing, 153. See also asceticism; castration; desires, breaking; rectification (rectification for a nocturnal emission); rectification (rectification of the covenant); seed, spilling in vain; tests (erotic) Shame, 8, 10, 11, 18-20, 31, 86, 285, 286, 289, 305

Shekhinah, 20, 26, 27, 52 (note 90), 156, 157, 162, 263, 191, 263, 264, 274, 275, 284, 286, 289, 297, 298, 341-344 Shema, recitation of, 145-149, 186, 266, 282, 283, 345 Song. See melody States of consciousness, 9, 23, 26, 27, 73-75, 98 (note 14), 110-113, 115, 118 (note 75), 126, 130, 132, 155, 211, 306, 339, 340, 346-349. See also dreams; stream of consciousness; vision Stories of Rabbi Nachman: editions of, 9 (note 7), 29, 31-37, 50, 85 (note 161), 91 (note 6), 195-199, 202, 203-207, 220, 225, 229-233, 252, 255 (note 112), 256, 288 (notes 30, 31), 290 (note 33), 303, 309; overall, 12, 14-17, 29-35, 38-46, 48-54, 56, 58, 60, 61, 63-65, 67-71, 73, 75-91, 93-95, 98-106, 108-133, 139, 153, 161, 181, 196-200, 202, 203, 205-210, 213, 225-233, 237, 239 (note 58), 240, 243, 245, 248, 255, 257, 258-269, 272, 275, 278, 289-291, 299, 307, 309, 321, 334, 339, 344-346; Rabbi Nachman as the protagonist of, 37, 77, 78, 127, 128, 340 Stream of consciousness, 126 (note 92), 347-349. See also states of consciousness Succot, 17, 123, 290, 309 Tales. See stories of Rabbi Nachman Tears, 146-149, 154, 160, 188, 245 Ten Commandments, 37, 46, 47 (note 68), 52, 55-57, 67, 70, 75, 77, 80, 88, 131, 352 Ten Days of Repentance, 21 (note 46), 300, 331 Teshuvah. See repentance Tests: erotic, 140, 149, 150, 152, 164, 166, 167, 192-196, 198, 200, 202 203 (note 21), 208-213, 215-218, 220, 272, 296, 340, 341; in martyrdom, 305; mystical, 8-10, 12, 14, 18, 19, 21-28, 56, 122, 125, 339, 340. See also letter combinations; revelation; states of consciousness; stream of consciousness; vision Torah learning, 8 (note 4), 10, 11, 14, 18, 19 (note 40), 25, 39 (note 41), 42, 44 (note





61), 55, 56, 69, 70, 86, 94, 184, 316 (note 11) Tree, 92, 94, 105, 106 (note 33), 108 (note 41), 114, 116-118, 122, 123 (note 88), 126 Tzaddik: overall, 15, 16, 18, 25, 35, 42, 48, 49, 51, 52 (note 88), 59, 64-70, 87, 106, 107, 128, 129, 149, 150, 152, 155, 159, 187, 195, 209 (notes 34, 35), 211, 220, 222, 223, 270, 271, 279, 287, 290, 299, 300, 304 (note 68), 309, 310; praise of the tzaddikim 17 (note 37), 155, 156, 159-161, 185-188, 312; Rabbi Nachman as tzaddik 24, 68, 71, 73, 89, 129, 131-134, 139, 152, 186, 187, 195, 209-211, 214, 215, 217-222, 288, 296, 300-302, 310, 314, 315, 320 (note 23), 332, 336-338; seeing the face of the tzaddik 61, 62, 65-68. See also hagiography; Hasidism Vessels, 27, 63, 92, 94, 105, 108, 114-119, 126, 131, 132, 217, 231 (note 30), 242, 252, 345, 92, 116 (note 67)

Subject Index 

 385

Vision, 14, 17-19, 23, 27, 28, 42, 47, 50-52, 68, 73, 75, 76, 80, 83 (note 157), 100, 101 (note 22), 105, 111, 117, 123 (note 88), 127, 131, 133, 134, 340. See also revelation; states of consciousness Weeping. See tears Wonders, 17 (note 37), 41 (note 50), 74, 110 (note 51), 237, 240, 252, 324, 329 Yom Kippur: dream about, 303-307; overall, 53, 54 (note 94), 55-57, 60, 61, 70, 71, 159 (note 75), 187, 300, 303, 305-309 Zohar, 42, 46, 52 (note 88), 59 (note 111), 62, 64, 105-108, 110, 111 (notes 55, 56), 118123, 126, 147 (note 17), 148, 150, 153, 154 (note 50), 158 (note 69), 163-165, 170 (note 120), 231, 235 (note 40), 236 (note 47), 239, 240, 248, 257, 270, 273-276, 282 (note 14), 292, 296, 344-346